2023-08-03 21:50:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
# THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF JURIES IN CIVIL SUITS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The evidence already given in the preceding chapters proves that the
|
|
|
|
|
rights and duties of jurors, in civil suits, were anciently the same as
|
|
|
|
|
in criminal ones; that the laws of the king were of no obligation upon
|
|
|
|
|
the consciences of the jurors, any further than the laws were seen by
|
|
|
|
|
them to be just; that very few laws were enacted applicable to civil
|
|
|
|
|
suits; that when a new law was enacted, the nature of it could have been
|
|
|
|
|
known to the jurors only by report, and was very likely not to be known
|
|
|
|
|
to them at all; that nearly all the law involved in civil suits was
|
|
|
|
|
_unwritten_; that there was _usually_ no one in attendance upon juries
|
|
|
|
|
who could possibly enlighten them, unless it were sheriffs, stewards,
|
|
|
|
|
and bailiffs, who were unquestionably too ignorant and untrustworthy to
|
|
|
|
|
instruct them authoritatively; that the jurors must therefore
|
|
|
|
|
necessarily have judged for themselves of the whole case; and that, _as
|
|
|
|
|
a general rule_, they could judge of it by no law but the law of nature,
|
|
|
|
|
or the principles of justice as they existed in their own minds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The ancient oath of jurors in civil suits, viz., that “_they would make
|
|
|
|
|
known the truth according to their consciences_,” implies that the
|
|
|
|
|
jurors were above the authority of all legislation. The modern oath, in
|
|
|
|
|
England, viz., that they “_will well and truly try the issue between the
|
|
|
|
|
parties, and a true verdict give, according to the evidence_,” implies
|
|
|
|
|
the same thing. If the laws of the king had been binding upon a jury,
|
|
|
|
|
they would have been sworn to try the cases _according to law_, or
|
|
|
|
|
according to the laws.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The ancient writs, in civil suits, as given in Glanville, (within the
|
|
|
|
|
half century before Magna Carta,) to wit, “Summon twelve free and legal
|
|
|
|
|
men, (or sometimes twelve knights,) to be in court, _prepared upon their
|
|
|
|
|
oaths to declare whether A or B have the greater right to the land in
|
|
|
|
|
question_,” indicate that the jurors judged of the whole matter on their
|
|
|
|
|
consciences only.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The language of Magna Carta, already discussed, establishes the same
|
|
|
|
|
point; for, although some of the words, such as “outlawed,” and
|
|
|
|
|
“exiled,” would apply only to criminal cases, nearly the whole chapter
|
|
|
|
|
applies as well to civil as to criminal suits. For example, how could
|
|
|
|
|
the payment of a debt ever be enforced against an unwilling debtor, if
|
|
|
|
|
he could neither be “arrested, imprisoned, nor deprived of his
|
|
|
|
|
freehold,” and if the king could neither “proceed against him, nor send
|
|
|
|
|
any one against him, by force or arms”? Yet Magna Carta as much forbids
|
|
|
|
|
that any of these things shall be done against a debtor, as against a
|
|
|
|
|
criminal, _except according to, or in execution of_, “_a judgment of his
|
|
|
|
|
peers, or the law of the land_,”—a provision which, it has been shown,
|
|
|
|
|
gave the jury the free and absolute right to give or withhold “judgment”
|
|
|
|
|
according to their consciences, irrespective of all legislation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following provisions, in the Magna Carta of John, illustrate the
|
|
|
|
|
custom of referring the most important matters of a civil nature, even
|
|
|
|
|
where the king was a party, to the determination of the peers, or of
|
|
|
|
|
twelve men, acting by no rules but their own consciences. These examples
|
|
|
|
|
at least show that there is nothing improbable or unnatural in the idea
|
|
|
|
|
that juries should try all civil suits according to their own judgments,
|
|
|
|
|
independently of all laws of the king.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> _Chap. 65._ “If we have disseized or dispossessed the Welsh of any
|
|
|
|
|
> lands, liberties, or other things, without the legal judgment of
|
|
|
|
|
> their peers, they shall be immediately restored to them. And if any
|
|
|
|
|
> dispute arises upon this head, the matter shall be determined in the
|
|
|
|
|
> Marches,[^68] _by the judgment of their peers_,” &c.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> _Chap. 68._ “We shall treat with Alexander, king of Scots, concerning
|
|
|
|
|
> the restoring of his sisters, and hostages, and rights and liberties,
|
|
|
|
|
> in the same form and manner as we shall do to the rest of our barons
|
|
|
|
|
> of England; unless by the engagements, which his father William, late
|
|
|
|
|
> king of Scots, hath entered into with us, it ought to be otherwise;
|
|
|
|
|
> _and this shall be left to the determination of his peers in our
|
|
|
|
|
> court_.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> _Chap. 56._ “All evil customs concerning forests, warrens, and
|
|
|
|
|
> foresters, warreners, sheriffs, and their officers, rivers and their
|
|
|
|
|
> keepers, shall forthwith be inquired into in each county, _by twelve
|
|
|
|
|
> knights of the same shire_, chosen by the most creditable persons in
|
|
|
|
|
> the same county, _and upon oath_; and within forty days after the
|
|
|
|
|
> said inquest, be utterly abolished, so as never to be restored.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is substantially the same reason why a jury _ought_ to judge of
|
|
|
|
|
the justice of laws, and hold all unjust laws invalid, in civil suits,
|
|
|
|
|
as in criminal ones. That reason is the necessity of guarding against
|
|
|
|
|
the tyranny of the government. Nearly the same oppressions can be
|
|
|
|
|
practised in civil suits as in criminal ones. For example, individuals
|
|
|
|
|
may be deprived of their liberty, and robbed of their property, by
|
|
|
|
|
judgments rendered in civil suits, as well as in criminal ones. If the
|
|
|
|
|
laws of the king were imperative upon a jury in civil suits, the king
|
|
|
|
|
might enact laws giving one man’s property to another, or confiscating
|
|
|
|
|
it to the king himself, and authorizing civil suits to obtain possession
|
|
|
|
|
of it. Thus a man might be robbed of his property at the arbitrary
|
|
|
|
|
pleasure of the king. In fact, all the property of the kingdom would be
|
|
|
|
|
placed at the arbitrary disposal of the king, through the judgments of
|
|
|
|
|
juries in civil suits, if the laws of the king were imperative upon a
|
|
|
|
|
jury in such suits.[^69]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Furthermore, it would be absurd and inconsistent to make a jury
|
|
|
|
|
paramount to legislation in _criminal_ suits, and subordinate to it in
|
|
|
|
|
_civil_ suits; because an individual, by resisting the execution of a
|
|
|
|
|
_civil_ judgment, founded upon an unjust law, could give rise to a
|
|
|
|
|
_criminal_ suit, in which the jury would be bound to hold the same law
|
|
|
|
|
invalid. So that, if an unjust law were binding upon a jury in _civil_
|
|
|
|
|
suits, a defendant, by resisting the execution of the judgment, could,
|
|
|
|
|
_in effect_, convert the civil action into a criminal one, in which the
|
|
|
|
|
jury would be paramount to the same legislation, to which, in the
|
|
|
|
|
_civil_ suit, they were subordinate. In other words, in the _criminal_
|
|
|
|
|
suit, the jury would be obliged to justify the defendant in resisting a
|
|
|
|
|
law, which, in the _civil_ suit, they had said he was bound to submit
|
|
|
|
|
to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To make this point plain to the most common mind—suppose a law be
|
|
|
|
|
enacted that the property of A shall be given to B. B brings a civil
|
|
|
|
|
action to obtain possession of it. If the jury, in this _civil_ suit,
|
|
|
|
|
are bound to hold the law obligatory, they render a judgment in favor of
|
|
|
|
|
B, that he be put in possession of the property; _thereby declaring that
|
|
|
|
|
A is bound to submit to a law depriving him of his property_. But when
|
|
|
|
|
the execution of that judgment comes to be attempted—that is, when the
|
|
|
|
|
sheriff comes to take the property for the purpose of delivering it to
|
|
|
|
|
B—A acting, as he has a _natural_ right to do, in defence of his
|
|
|
|
|
property, resists and kills the sheriff. He is thereupon indicted for
|
|
|
|
|
murder. On this trial his plea is, that in killing the sheriff, he was
|
|
|
|
|
simply exercising his _natural_ right of defending his property against
|
|
|
|
|
an unjust law. The jury, not being bound, in a _criminal_ case, by the
|
|
|
|
|
authority of an unjust law, judge the act on its merits, and acquit the
|
|
|
|
|
defendant—thus declaring that he was _not_ bound to submit to the same
|
|
|
|
|
law which the jury, in the _civil_ suit, had, by their judgment,
|
|
|
|
|
declared that he _was_ bound to submit to. Here is a contradiction
|
|
|
|
|
between the two judgments. In the _civil_ suit, the law is declared to
|
|
|
|
|
be obligatory upon A; in the _criminal_ suit, the same law is declared
|
|
|
|
|
to be of no obligation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It would be a solecism and absurdity in government to allow such
|
|
|
|
|
consequences as these. Besides, it would be practically impossible to
|
|
|
|
|
maintain government on such principles; for no government could enforce
|
|
|
|
|
its _civil_ judgments, unless it could support them by _criminal_ ones,
|
|
|
|
|
in case of resistance. A jury must therefore be paramount to legislation
|
|
|
|
|
in both civil and criminal cases, or in neither. If they are paramount
|
|
|
|
|
in neither, they are no protection to liberty. If they are paramount in
|
|
|
|
|
both, then all legislation goes only for what it may chance to be worth
|
|
|
|
|
in the estimation of a jury.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Another reason why Magna Carta makes the discretion and consciences of
|
|
|
|
|
juries paramount to all legislation in _civil_ suits, is, that if
|
|
|
|
|
legislation were binding upon a jury, the jurors—(by reason of their
|
|
|
|
|
being unable to read, as jurors in those days were, and also by reason
|
|
|
|
|
of many of the statutes being unwritten, or at least not so many copies
|
|
|
|
|
written as that juries could be supplied with them)—would have been
|
|
|
|
|
necessitated—at least in those courts in which the king’s justices
|
|
|
|
|
sat—to take the word of those justices as to what the laws of the king
|
|
|
|
|
really were. In other words, they would have been necessitated _to take
|
|
|
|
|
the law from the court_, as jurors do now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now there were two reasons why, as we may rationally suppose, the people
|
|
|
|
|
did not wish juries to take their law from the king’s judges. One was,
|
|
|
|
|
that, at that day, the people probably had sense enough to see, (what
|
|
|
|
|
we, at this day, have not sense enough to see, although we have the
|
|
|
|
|
evidence of it every day before our eyes,) that those judges, being
|
|
|
|
|
dependent upon the legislative power, (the king,) being appointed by it,
|
|
|
|
|
paid by it, and removable by it at pleasure, would be mere tools of that
|
|
|
|
|
power, and would hold all its legislation obligatory, whether it were
|
|
|
|
|
just or unjust. This was one reason, doubtless, why Magna Carta made
|
|
|
|
|
juries, in civil suits, paramount to all instructions of the king’s
|
|
|
|
|
judges. The reason was precisely the same as that for making them
|
|
|
|
|
paramount to all instructions of judges in criminal suits, viz., that
|
|
|
|
|
the people did not choose to subject their rights of property, and all
|
|
|
|
|
other rights involved in civil suits, to the operation of such laws as
|
|
|
|
|
the king might please to enact. It was seen that to allow the king’s
|
|
|
|
|
judges to dictate the law to the jury would be equivalent to making the
|
|
|
|
|
legislation of the king imperative upon the jury.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Another reason why the people did not wish juries, in civil suits, to
|
|
|
|
|
take their law from the king’s judges, doubtless was, that, knowing the
|
|
|
|
|
dependence of the judges upon the king, and knowing that the king would,
|
|
|
|
|
of course, tolerate no judges who were not subservient to his will, they
|
|
|
|
|
necessarily inferred that the king’s judges would be as corrupt, in the
|
|
|
|
|
administration of justice, as was the king himself, or as he wished them
|
|
|
|
|
to be. And how corrupt that was, may be inferred from the following
|
|
|
|
|
historical facts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hume says:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> “It appears that the ancient kings of England put themselves entirely
|
|
|
|
|
> upon the footing of the barbarous Eastern princes, whom no man must
|
|
|
|
|
> approach without a present, who sell all their good offices, and who
|
|
|
|
|
> intrude themselves into every business that they may have a pretence
|
|
|
|
|
> for extorting money. Even justice was avowedly bought and sold; the
|
|
|
|
|
> king’s court itself, though the supreme judicature of the kingdom,
|
|
|
|
|
> was open to none that brought not presents to the king; the bribes
|
|
|
|
|
> given for expedition, delay, suspension, and doubtless for the
|
|
|
|
|
> perversion of justice, were entered in the public registers of the
|
|
|
|
|
> royal revenue, and remain as monuments of the perpetual iniquity and
|
|
|
|
|
> tyranny of the times. The barons of the exchequer, for instance, the
|
|
|
|
|
> first nobility of the kingdom, were not ashamed to insert, as an
|
|
|
|
|
> article in their records, that the county of Norfolk paid a sum that
|
|
|
|
|
> they might be fairly dealt with; the borough of Yarmouth, that the
|
|
|
|
|
> king’s charters, which they have for their liberties, might not be
|
|
|
|
|
> violated; Richard, son of Gilbert, for the king’s helping him to
|
|
|
|
|
> recover his debt from the Jews; * * Serlo, son of Terlavaston, that
|
|
|
|
|
> he might be permitted to make his defence, in case he were accused of
|
|
|
|
|
> a certain homicide; Walter de Burton, for free law, if accused of
|
|
|
|
|
> wounding another; Robert de Essart, for having an inquest to find
|
|
|
|
|
> whether Roger, the butcher, and Wace and Humphrey, accused him of
|
|
|
|
|
> robbery and theft out of envy and ill-will, or not; William Buhurst,
|
|
|
|
|
> for having an inquest to find whether he were accused of the death of
|
|
|
|
|
> one Godwin, out of ill-will, or for just cause. I have selected these
|
|
|
|
|
> few instances from a great number of the like kind, which Madox had
|
|
|
|
|
> selected from a still greater number, preserved in the ancient rolls
|
|
|
|
|
> of the exchequer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> Sometimes a party litigant offered the king a certain portion, a
|
|
|
|
|
> half, a third, a fourth, payable out of the debts which he, as the
|
|
|
|
|
> executor of justice, should assist in recovering. Theophania de
|
|
|
|
|
> Westland agreed to pay the half of two hundred and twelve marks, that
|
|
|
|
|
> she might recover that sum against James de Fughleston; Solomon, the
|
|
|
|
|
> Jew, engaged to pay one mark out of every seven that he should
|
|
|
|
|
> recover against Hugh de la Hose; Nicholas Morrel promised to pay
|
|
|
|
|
> sixty pounds, that the Earl of Flanders might be distrained to pay
|
|
|
|
|
> him three hundred and forty-three pounds, which the earl had taken
|
|
|
|
|
> from him; and these sixty pounds were to be paid out of the first
|
|
|
|
|
> money that Nicholas should recover from the earl.”—_Hume, Appendix
|
|
|
|
|
> 2._
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> “In the reign of Henry II., the best and most just of these (the
|
|
|
|
|
> Norman) princes, * * Peter, of Blois, a judicious and even elegant
|
|
|
|
|
> writer, of that age, gives a pathetic description of the _venality of
|
|
|
|
|
> justice_, and the oppressions of the poor, * * and he scruples not to
|
|
|
|
|
> complain to the king himself of these abuses. We may judge what the
|
|
|
|
|
> case would be under the government of worse princes.”—_Hume,
|
|
|
|
|
> Appendix 2._
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carte says:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> “The crown exercised in those days an exorbitant and inconvenient
|
|
|
|
|
> power, ordering the justices of the king’s court, in suits about
|
|
|
|
|
> lands, to turn out, put, and keep in possession, which of the
|
|
|
|
|
> litigants they pleased; to send contradictory orders; and take large
|
|
|
|
|
> sums of money from each; to respite proceedings; to direct sentences;
|
|
|
|
|
> and the judges, acting by their commission, conceived themselves
|
|
|
|
|
> bound to observe such orders, to the great delay, interruption, and
|
|
|
|
|
> preventing of justice; at least, this was John’s practice.”—_Carte’s
|
|
|
|
|
> History of England_, vol. 1, p. 832.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hallam says:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> “But of all the abuses that deformed the Anglo-Saxon government, none
|
|
|
|
|
> was so flagitious as the sale of judicial redress. The king, we are
|
|
|
|
|
> often told, is the fountain of justice; but in those ages it was one
|
|
|
|
|
> which gold alone could unseal. Men fined (paid fines) to have right
|
|
|
|
|
> done them; to sue in a certain court; to implead a certain person; to
|
|
|
|
|
> have restitution of land which they had recovered at law. From the
|
|
|
|
|
> sale of that justice which every citizen has a right to demand, it
|
|
|
|
|
> was an easy transition to withhold or deny it. Fines were received
|
|
|
|
|
> for the king’s help against the adverse suitor; that is, for
|
|
|
|
|
> perversion of justice, or for delay. Sometimes they were paid by
|
|
|
|
|
> opposite parties, and, of course, for opposite ends.”—_2 Middle
|
|
|
|
|
> Ages_, 438.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In allusion to the provision of Magna Carta on this subject, Hallam
|
|
|
|
|
says:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> “A law which enacts that justice shall neither be sold, denied, nor
|
|
|
|
|
> delayed, stamps with infamy that government under which it had become
|
|
|
|
|
> necessary.”—_2 Middle Ages_, 451.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lingard, speaking of the times of Henry II., (say 1184,) says:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> “It was universally understood that money possessed greater influence
|
|
|
|
|
> than justice in the royal courts, and instances are on record, in
|
|
|
|
|
> which one party has made the king a present to accelerate, and the
|
|
|
|
|
> other by a more valuable offer has succeeded in retarding a decision.
|
|
|
|
|
> * * But besides the fines paid to the sovereigns, _the judges often
|
|
|
|
|
> exacted presents for themselves_, and loud complaints existed against
|
|
|
|
|
> their venality and injustice.”—_2 Lingard_, 231.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the narrative of “The costs and charges which I, Richard de Anesty,
|
|
|
|
|
bestowed in recovering the land of William, my uncle,” (some fifty years
|
|
|
|
|
before Magna Carta,) are the following items:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> “To Ralph, the king’s physician, I gave thirty-six marks and one
|
|
|
|
|
> half; to the king an hundred marks; and to the queen one mark of
|
|
|
|
|
> gold.” The result is thus stated. “At last, thanks to our lord the
|
|
|
|
|
> king, and by judgment of his court, my uncle’s land was adjudged to
|
|
|
|
|
> me.”—_2 Palgrave’s Rise and Progress of the English Commonwealth_,
|
|
|
|
|
> p. 9 and 24.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Palgrave also says:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> “The precious ore was cast into the scales of justice, even when held
|
|
|
|
|
> by the most conscientious of our Anglo-Saxon kings. A single case
|
|
|
|
|
> will exemplify the practices which prevailed. Alfric, the heir of
|
|
|
|
|
> ‘Aylwin, the black,’ seeks to set aside the death-bed bequest, by
|
|
|
|
|
> which his kinsman bestowed four rich and fertile manors upon St.
|
|
|
|
|
> Benedict. Alfric, the claimant, was supported by extensive and
|
|
|
|
|
> powerful connexions; and Abbot Alfwine, the defendant, was well aware
|
|
|
|
|
> that there would be _danger_ in the discussion of the dispute in
|
|
|
|
|
> public, or before the Folkmoot, (people’s meeting, or county court);
|
|
|
|
|
> or, in other words, that the Thanes of the shire would do their best
|
|
|
|
|
> to give a judgment in favor of their compeer. The plea being removed
|
|
|
|
|
> into the Royal Court, the abbot acted with that prudence which so
|
|
|
|
|
> often calls forth the praises of the monastic scribe. He gladly
|
|
|
|
|
> emptied twenty marks of gold into the sleeve of the Confessor,
|
|
|
|
|
> (Edward,) and five marks of gold presented to Edith, the Fair,
|
|
|
|
|
> encouraged her to aid the bishop, and to exercise her gentle
|
|
|
|
|
> influence in his favor. Alfric, with equal wisdom, withdrew from
|
|
|
|
|
> prosecuting the hopeless cause, in which his opponent might possess
|
|
|
|
|
> an advocate in the royal judge, and a friend in the king’s consort.
|
|
|
|
|
> Both parties, therefore, found it desirable to come to an
|
|
|
|
|
> agreement.”—_1 Palgrave’s Rise and Progress, &c._, p. 650.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But Magna Carta has another provision for the trial of _civil_ suits,
|
|
|
|
|
that obviously had its origin in the corruption of the king’s judges.
|
|
|
|
|
The provision is, that four knights, to be chosen in every county, by
|
|
|
|
|
the people of the county, shall sit with the king’s judges, in the
|
|
|
|
|
Common Pleas, in jury trials, (assizes,) on the trial of three certain
|
|
|
|
|
kinds of suits, that were among the most important that were tried at
|
|
|
|
|
all. The reason for this provision undoubtedly was, that the corruption
|
|
|
|
|
and subserviency of the king’s judges were so well known, that the
|
|
|
|
|
people would not even trust them to sit alone in a jury trial of any
|
|
|
|
|
considerable importance. The provision is this:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> _Chap. 22_, (of John’s Charter.) “Common Pleas shall not follow our
|
|
|
|
|
> court, but shall be holden in some certain place. Trials upon the
|
|
|
|
|
> writ of _novel disseisin_, and of _Mort d’Ancester_, and of _Darrein
|
|
|
|
|
> Presentment_, shall be taken but in their proper counties, and after
|
|
|
|
|
> this manner: We, or, if we should be out of our realm, our chief
|
|
|
|
|
> justiciary, shall send two justiciaries through every county four
|
|
|
|
|
> times a year;[^70] _who, with four knights chosen out of every shire,
|
|
|
|
|
> by the people, shall hold the assizes_ (juries) _in the county, on
|
|
|
|
|
> the day and at the place appointed_.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It would be very unreasonable to suppose that the king’s judges were
|
|
|
|
|
allowed to _dictate_ the law to the juries, when the people would not
|
|
|
|
|
even suffer them to sit alone in jury trials, but themselves chose four
|
|
|
|
|
men to sit with them, to keep them honest.[^71]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This practice of sending the king’s judges into the counties to preside
|
|
|
|
|
at jury trials, was introduced by the Norman kings. Under the Saxons it
|
|
|
|
|
was not so. _No officer of the king was allowed to preside at a jury
|
|
|
|
|
trial; but only magistrates chosen by the people._[^72]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But the following chapter of John’s charter, which immediately succeeds
|
|
|
|
|
the one just quoted, and refers to the same suits, affords very strong,
|
|
|
|
|
not to say conclusive, proof, that juries judged of the law in civil
|
|
|
|
|
suits—that is, _made the law_, so far as their deciding according to
|
|
|
|
|
their own notions of justice could make the law.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> _Chap. 23._ “And if, on the county day, the aforesaid assizes cannot
|
|
|
|
|
> be taken, _so many knights and freeholders shall remain, of those who
|
|
|
|
|
> shall have been present on said day, as that the judgments may be
|
|
|
|
|
> rendered by them_, whether the business be more or less.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The meaning of this chapter is, that so many of the _civil_ suits, as
|
|
|
|
|
could not be tried on the day when the king’s justices were present,
|
|
|
|
|
should be tried afterwards, _by the four knights before mentioned, and
|
|
|
|
|
the freeholders, that is, the jury_. It must be admitted, of course,
|
|
|
|
|
that the juries, in these cases, judged the matters of law, as well as
|
|
|
|
|
fact, unless it be presumed that the _knights_ dictated the law to the
|
|
|
|
|
jury—a thing of which there is no evidence at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a final proof on this point, there is a statute enacted seventy years
|
|
|
|
|
after Magna Carta, which, although it is contrary to the common law, and
|
|
|
|
|
therefore void, is nevertheless good evidence, inasmuch as it contains
|
|
|
|
|
an acknowledgment, on the part of the king himself, that juries had a
|
|
|
|
|
right to judge of the whole matter, law and fact, in civil suits. The
|
|
|
|
|
provision is this:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> “It is ordained, that the justices assigned to take the assizes,
|
|
|
|
|
> shall not compel the jurors to say precisely whether it be disseisin,
|
|
|
|
|
> or not, so that they do show the truth of the deed, and seek aid of
|
|
|
|
|
> the justices. But if they will, of their own accord, say that it is
|
|
|
|
|
> disseisin, or not, their verdict shall be admitted at their own
|
|
|
|
|
> peril.”—_13 Edward I._, st. 1, ch. 3, sec. 2. (1285.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The question of “disseisin, or not,” was a question of law, as well as
|
|
|
|
|
fact. This statute, therefore, admits that the law, as well as the fact,
|
|
|
|
|
was in the hands of the jury. The statute is nevertheless void, because
|
|
|
|
|
the king had no authority to give jurors a dispensation from the
|
|
|
|
|
obligation imposed upon them by their oaths and the “law of the land,”
|
|
|
|
|
that they should “make known the truth according their (own)
|
|
|
|
|
consciences.” This they were bound to do, and there was no power in the
|
|
|
|
|
king to absolve them from the duty. And the attempt of the king thus to
|
|
|
|
|
absolve them, and authorize them to throw the case into the hands of the
|
|
|
|
|
judges for decision, was simply an illegal and unconstitutional attempt
|
|
|
|
|
to overturn the “law of the land,” which he was sworn to maintain, and
|
|
|
|
|
gather power into his own hands, through his judges. He had just as much
|
|
|
|
|
constitutional power to enact that the jurors should not be compelled to
|
|
|
|
|
declare the _facts_, but that they might leave _them_ to be determined
|
|
|
|
|
by the king’s judges, as he had to enact that they should not be
|
|
|
|
|
compelled to declare the _law_, but might leave _it_ to be decided by
|
|
|
|
|
the king’s judges. It was as much the legal duty of the jury to decide
|
|
|
|
|
the law as to decide the fact; and no law of the king could affect their
|
|
|
|
|
obligation to do either. And this statute is only one example of the
|
|
|
|
|
numberless contrivances and usurpations which have been resorted to, for
|
|
|
|
|
the purpose of destroying the original and genuine trial by jury.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023-08-04 00:46:41 +00:00
|
|
|
|
[^68]: _Marches_, the limits, or boundaries, between England and
|
|
|
|
|
Wales.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[^69]: That the kings would have had no scruples to enact laws
|
|
|
|
|
for the special purpose of plundering the people, by means of the
|
|
|
|
|
judgments of juries, if they could have got juries to acknowledge the
|
|
|
|
|
authority of their laws, is evident from the audacity with which they
|
|
|
|
|
plundered them, without any judgments of juries to authorize them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is not necessary to occupy space here to give details as to these
|
|
|
|
|
robberies; but only some evidence of the general fact.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> Hallam says, that “For the first three reigns (of the Norman kings) *
|
|
|
|
|
> * the intolerable exactions of tribute, the rapine of purveyance, the
|
|
|
|
|
> iniquity of royal courts, are continually in the mouths of the
|
|
|
|
|
> historians. ‘God sees the wretched people,’ says the Saxon
|
|
|
|
|
> Chronicler, ‘most unjustly oppressed; first they are despoiled of
|
|
|
|
|
> their possessions, and then butchered.’ This was a grievous year
|
|
|
|
|
> (1124). Whoever had any property, lost it by heavy taxes and unjust
|
|
|
|
|
> decrees.”—_2 Middle Ages_, 435-6.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> “In the succeeding reign of _John_, all the rapacious exactions usual
|
|
|
|
|
> to these Norman kings were not only redoubled, but mingled with
|
|
|
|
|
> outrages of tyranny still more intolerable. * *
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> “In 1207 John took a seventh of the movables of lay and spiritual
|
|
|
|
|
> persons, all murmuring, but none daring to speak against
|
|
|
|
|
> it.”—_Ditto_, 446.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In Hume’s account of the extortions of those times, the following
|
|
|
|
|
paragraph occurs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> “But the most barefaced acts of tyranny and oppression were practised
|
|
|
|
|
> against the Jews, who were entirely out of the protection of the law,
|
|
|
|
|
> and were abandoned to the immeasurable rapacity of the king and his
|
|
|
|
|
> ministers. Besides many other indignities, to which they were
|
|
|
|
|
> continually exposed, it appears that they were once all thrown into
|
|
|
|
|
> prison, and the sum of 66,000 marks exacted for their liberty. At
|
|
|
|
|
> another time, Isaac, the Jew, paid alone 5100 marks; Brun, 3000
|
|
|
|
|
> marks; Jurnet, 2000; Bennet, 500. At another, Licorica, widow of
|
|
|
|
|
> David, the Jew of Oxford, was required to pay 6000 marks.”—_Hume’s
|
|
|
|
|
> Hist. Eng., Appendix_ 2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Further accounts of the extortions and oppressions of the kings may be
|
|
|
|
|
found in Hume’s History, Appendix 2, and in Hallam’s Middle Ages, vol.
|
|
|
|
|
2, p. 435 to 446.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By Magna Carta John bound himself to make restitution for some of the
|
|
|
|
|
spoliations he had committed upon individuals “_without the legal
|
|
|
|
|
judgment of their peers_.”—_See Magna Carta of John_, ch. 60, 61, 65
|
|
|
|
|
and 66.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One of the great charges, on account of which the nation rose against
|
|
|
|
|
John, was, that he plundered individuals of their property, “_without
|
|
|
|
|
legal judgment of their peers_.” Now it was evidently very weak and
|
|
|
|
|
short-sighted in John to expose himself to such charges, _if his laws
|
|
|
|
|
were really obligatory upon the peers_; because, in that case, he could
|
|
|
|
|
have enacted any laws that were necessary for his purpose, and then, by
|
|
|
|
|
civil suits, have brought the cases before juries for their “judgment,”
|
|
|
|
|
and thus have accomplished all his robberies in a perfectly legal
|
|
|
|
|
manner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There would evidently have been no sense in these complaints, that he
|
|
|
|
|
deprived men of their property “_without legal judgment of their
|
|
|
|
|
peers_,” if his laws had been binding upon the peers; because he could
|
|
|
|
|
then have made the same spoliations as well with the judgment of the
|
|
|
|
|
peers as without it. Taking the judgment of the peers in the matter,
|
|
|
|
|
would have been only a ridiculous and useless formality, if they were to
|
|
|
|
|
exercise no discretion or conscience of their own, independently of the
|
|
|
|
|
laws of the king.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It may here be mentioned, in passing, that the same would be true in
|
|
|
|
|
criminal matters, if the king’s laws were obligatory upon juries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As an illustration of what tyranny the kings would sometimes practise,
|
|
|
|
|
Hume says:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> “It appears from the Great Charter itself, that not only John, a
|
|
|
|
|
> tyrannical prince, and Richard, a violent one, but their father
|
|
|
|
|
> Henry, under whose reign the prevalence of gross abuses is the least
|
|
|
|
|
> to be suspected, were accustomed, from their sole authority, without
|
|
|
|
|
> process of law, to imprison, banish, and attaint the freemen of their
|
|
|
|
|
> kingdom.”—_Hume, Appendix_ 2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The provision, also, in the 64th chapter of Magna Carta, that “all
|
|
|
|
|
unjust and illegal fines, and all amercements, _imposed unjustly, and
|
|
|
|
|
contrary to the Law of the Land, shall be entirely forgiven_,” &c.; and
|
|
|
|
|
the provision, in chapter 61, that the king “will cause full justice to
|
|
|
|
|
be administered” in regard to “all those things, of which any person
|
|
|
|
|
has, without legal judgment of his peers, been dispossessed or deprived,
|
|
|
|
|
either by King Henry, our father, or our brother, King Richard,”
|
|
|
|
|
indicate the tyrannical practices that prevailed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> We are told also that John himself “had dispossessed several great
|
|
|
|
|
> men without any judgment of their peers, condemned others to cruel
|
|
|
|
|
> deaths, * * insomuch that his tyrannical will stood instead of a
|
|
|
|
|
> law.”—_Echard’s History of England_, 106.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now all these things were very unnecessary and foolish, if his laws were
|
|
|
|
|
binding upon juries; because, in that case, he could have procured the
|
|
|
|
|
conviction of these men in a legal manner, and thus have saved the
|
|
|
|
|
necessity of such usurpation. In short, if the laws of the king had been
|
|
|
|
|
binding upon juries, there is no robbery, vengeance, or oppression,
|
|
|
|
|
which he could not have accomplished through the judgments of juries.
|
|
|
|
|
This consideration is sufficient, of itself, to prove that the laws of
|
|
|
|
|
the king were of no authority over a jury, in either civil or criminal
|
|
|
|
|
cases, unless the juries regarded the laws as just in themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[^70]: By the Magna Carta of Henry III. this is changed to once a
|
|
|
|
|
year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[^71]: From the provision of Magna Carta, cited in the text, it
|
|
|
|
|
must be inferred that there can be no legal trial by jury, in civil
|
|
|
|
|
cases, if only the king’s justices preside; that, to make the trial
|
|
|
|
|
legal, there must be other persons, chosen by the people, to sit with
|
|
|
|
|
them; the object being to prevent the jury’s being deceived by the
|
|
|
|
|
justices. I think we must also infer that the king’s justices could sit
|
|
|
|
|
only in the three actions specially mentioned. We cannot go beyond the
|
|
|
|
|
letter of Magna Carta, in making innovations upon the common law, which
|
|
|
|
|
required all presiding officers in jury trials to be elected by the
|
|
|
|
|
people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[^72]: “The earls, sheriffs, and head-boroughs were annually
|
|
|
|
|
elected in the full folcmote, (people’s meeting).”—_Introduction to
|
|
|
|
|
Gilbert’s History of the Common Pleas_, p. 2, _note_.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
“It was the especial province of the earldomen or earl to attend the
|
|
|
|
|
shyre-meeting, (the county court,) twice a year, and there officiate as
|
|
|
|
|
the county judge in expounding the secular laws, as appears by the fifth
|
|
|
|
|
of Edgar’s laws.”—_Same_, p. 2, _note_.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
“Every ward had its proper alderman, who was _chosen_, and not imposed
|
|
|
|
|
by the prince.”—_Same_, p. 4, _text_.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
“As the aldermen, or earls, were always _chosen_” (by the people) “from
|
|
|
|
|
among the greatest thanes, who in those times were generally more
|
|
|
|
|
addicted to arms than to letters, they were but ill-qualified for the
|
|
|
|
|
administration of justice, and performing the civil duties of their
|
|
|
|
|
office.”—_3 Henry’s History of Great Britain_, 343.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
“But none of these thanes were annually elected in the full folcmote,
|
|
|
|
|
(people’s meeting,) _as the earls, sheriffs, and head-boroughs were_;
|
|
|
|
|
nor did King Alfred (as this author suggests) deprive the people of the
|
|
|
|
|
election of those last mentioned magistrates and nobles, much less did
|
|
|
|
|
he appoint them himself.”—_Introd. to Gilbert’s Hist. Com. Pleas_, p.
|
|
|
|
|
2, _note_.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
“The sheriff was usually not appointed by the lord, but elected by the
|
|
|
|
|
freeholders of the district.”—_Political Dictionary_, word _Sheriff_.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
“Among the most remarkable of the Saxon laws we may reckon * * the
|
|
|
|
|
election of their magistrates by the people, originally even that of
|
|
|
|
|
their kings, till dear-bought experience evinced the convenience and
|
|
|
|
|
necessity of establishing an hereditary succession to the crown. But
|
|
|
|
|
that (the election) of all subordinate magistrates, their military
|
|
|
|
|
officers or heretochs, their sheriffs, their conservators of the peace,
|
|
|
|
|
their coroners, their portreeves, (since changed into mayors and
|
|
|
|
|
bailiffs,) and even their tithing-men and borsholders at the last,
|
|
|
|
|
continued, some, till the Norman conquest, others for two centuries
|
|
|
|
|
after, and some remain to this day.”—_4 Blackstone_, 413.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
“The election of sheriffs was left to the people, _according to ancient
|
|
|
|
|
usage_.”—_St. West._ 1, c. 27.—_Crabbe’s History of English Law_,
|
|
|
|
|
181.
|