FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   145   146   147   148   149   150   151   152   153   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169  
170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   >>   >|  
r had any constitutional authority to infringe, by legislation, any essential principle of the common law in the selection of jurors. All such legislation is as much unconstitutional and void, as though it abolished the trial by jury altogether. In reality it does abolish it. What, then, are the _essential principles_ of the common law, controlling the selection of jurors? They are two. 1. That _all_ the freemen, or adult male members of the state, shall be eligible as jurors.[80] Any legislation which requires the selection of jurors to be made from a less number of freemen than the whole, makes the jury selected an illegal one. If a part only of the freemen, or members of the state, are eligible as jurors, the jury no longer represent "the country," but only a part of "the country." If the selection of jurors can be restricted to any less number of freemen than the whole, it can be restricted to a very small proportion of the whole; and thus the government be taken out of the hands of "the country," or the whole people, and be thrown into the hands of a few. That, at common law, the whole body of freemen were eligible as jurors is sufficiently proved, not only by the reason of the thing, but by the following evidence: 1. Everybody must be presumed eligible, until the contrary be shown. We have no evidence, that I am aware of, of a prior date to Magna Carta, to _disprove_ that all freemen were eligible as jurors, unless it be the law of Ethelred, which requires that they be elderly[81] men. Since no specific age is given, it is probable, I think, that this statute meant nothing more than that they be more than twenty-one years old. If it meant anything more, it was probably contrary to the common law, and therefore void. 2. Since Magna Carta, we have evidence showing quite conclusively that all freemen, above the age of twenty-one years, were eligible as jurors. The _Mirror of Justices_, (written within a century after Magna Carta,) in the section "_Of Judges_"--that is, _jurors_--says: "All those who are not forbidden by law may be judges (jurors). To women it is forbidden by law that they be judges; and thence it is, that feme coverts are exempted to do suit in inferior courts. On the other part, a villein cannot be a judge, by reason of the two estates, which are repugnants; persons attainted of false judgments cannot be judges, nor infants, nor any under the age of twenty-o
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   145   146   147   148   149   150   151   152   153   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169  
170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
jurors
 

freemen

 

eligible

 
selection
 
common
 
country
 

evidence

 

judges

 

twenty

 

legislation


number
 
requires
 

reason

 

restricted

 

essential

 

forbidden

 

contrary

 

members

 

statute

 

showing


conclusively
 

probable

 

specific

 
villein
 

courts

 
inferior
 
estates
 

repugnants

 

infants

 

judgments


persons

 

attainted

 
exempted
 
coverts
 

section

 
century
 

Mirror

 

Justices

 

written

 

Judges


controlling

 

principles

 
selected
 

abolish

 
infringe
 
principle
 

authority

 

constitutional

 
unconstitutional
 

reality