FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   1048   1049   1050   1051   1052   1053   1054   1055   1056   1057   1058   1059   1060   1061   1062   1063   1064   1065   1066   1067   1068   1069   1070   1071   1072  
1073   1074   1075   1076   1077   1078   1079   1080   1081   1082   1083   1084   1085   1086   1087   1088   1089   1090   1091   1092   1093   1094   1095   1096   1097   >>   >|  
mitted that the general criminal law of England was the law of libel. And by the general criminal law of England, the office of the jury is judicial. "They only are the judges," as Lord Somers observes (Essay on the Power and Duty of Grand Juries, p. 7), "from whose sentence the indicted are to expect life or death. Upon their integrity and understanding the lives of all that are brought into judgment do ultimately depend. From their verdict there lies no appeal. They resolve both law and fact, and this has always been their practice." And, after referring to the case of Franklin, and other cases holding a contrary doctrine, he denounces them as innovations, and adding that the subject underwent a patient investigation and severe scrutiny upon principle and precedent in Parliament, says: And a bill declaratory of the right of the jury to give a general verdict upon the whole matter put in issue, without being required or directed to find the defendant guilty merely on the proof of publication and the truth of the innuendoes, was at length agreed to, and passed with uncommon unanimity. It is entitled "An act to remove doubts respecting the functions of juries in cases of libel"; and, although I admit that a declaratory statute is not to be received as conclusive evidence of the common law, yet it must be considered as a very respectable authority in the case, and especially as the circumstances attending the passage of this bill reflect the highest honor on the moderation, the good sense, and the free and independent spirit of the British Parliament. And again he says: The result, from this view, is, to my mind, a firm conviction that this court is not bound by the decisions of Lord Raymond and his successors. By withdrawing from the jury the consideration of the essence of the charge, they render their function nugatory and contemptible. Those opinions are repugnant to the more ancient authorities which had given to the jury the power, and with it the right, to judge of the law and the fact, when they were blended by the issue, and which rendered their decisions, in crim
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   1048   1049   1050   1051   1052   1053   1054   1055   1056   1057   1058   1059   1060   1061   1062   1063   1064   1065   1066   1067   1068   1069   1070   1071   1072  
1073   1074   1075   1076   1077   1078   1079   1080   1081   1082   1083   1084   1085   1086   1087   1088   1089   1090   1091   1092   1093   1094   1095   1096   1097   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

general

 

declaratory

 
verdict
 

Parliament

 

decisions

 

England

 

criminal

 

circumstances

 

authority

 

juries


respectable

 

received

 

attending

 

passage

 

highest

 

reflect

 
considered
 

remove

 

doubts

 

respecting


evidence

 

common

 

functions

 

unanimity

 
statute
 

entitled

 

conclusive

 
opinions
 

repugnant

 
contemptible

nugatory
 
essence
 

charge

 

render

 

function

 

ancient

 

authorities

 
blended
 
rendered
 

consideration


withdrawing

 
British
 
result
 

spirit

 

independent

 

Raymond

 
successors
 

uncommon

 

conviction

 

moderation