322 DUBOIS— PSYCHOLOGY OF JURORS AND JURIES [April 23, 



pores of which are juicy with the very quintessence of evidence. The 

 keen juror, scenting the aroma, longs to tap or squeeze out the sap 

 of truth. But who is he, forsooth, but a juryman? 



A physician, speaking out of much experience as an expert wit- 

 ness, told his medical associates that it is not enough that the evidence 

 which they might be called on to give should be the truth. This, in- 

 deed, he said, has little to do with it for it must agree with the 

 lawyers' and the court's idea of what is evidence, which is sometimes 

 quite another thing. 



Meantime the poor juror is between the devil and the deep sea — 

 between the professional battle to suppress facts and his own sense 

 of essential truth ; between his own real conscience and the artificially 

 imposed conscience of the court. So long, therefore, as " the evi- 

 dence " is prescribed by the court the juror ought not to be sw'orn to 

 render verdict according to " the evidence," but without prejudice 

 to strive to be just to all parties concerned. No other discipline is 

 just to any party concerned. 



There is strong tendency to reduce the employment of juries. 

 The question is whether there could not be a better kind of jury, 

 partaking at once of lay and of professional advantages. It would 

 be perhaps a permanent board adequately paid, non political, smaller 

 than our present jury, not bound by the rule of unanimity, having 

 large authority in taking and using testimony, and treated with the 

 dignity due to the upper officers of a court of justice. In other 

 words the disciplinary irritants, drawbacks, indignities, coercion, 

 threats and sources of indifference and personal bias should be re- 

 duced to the minimum. Only thus can the balances of the juror's 

 mind work as freely as possible in the valuation of evidence — which 

 evidence, in very truth is not limited to the sworn statements of 

 witnesses or other facts of the testimony but grows out of the 

 interpretation of experience and of human nature in the large. The 

 system, whatever it is, should not indifferently permit or encourage 

 self-defeat. Justice to the contending parties rests in no small degree 

 on justice to the jury. 



