JITIY. 



JURY. 



to the growth of the proceeding 



of UM limlmiton of witaiani or of evidence 

 iwicato Enfiand. which formed the ootnmeocement 

 m their character, occur in the reign of Heir 



uddenly, or by any particular act of 

 by alow degree* a* population increased. 



of -ooie^r underwent alteration; and though 



diaoMibb in the rwgn of Henry VI.. wa* not completely 

 of Edward VI. and Mary. Fortescue. in the 





of hi* work ' De Laudibu* Legum Anglic.' written at the 

 of Henry VI.. and about the year 1470, czpreaaly 

 i were examined and awora before the jury ; 

 liacruainatcly lota and Jwotarvt, and make* 

 their character a* witaeaaea. Shortly after 

 namely, in the year 1498 there U a reported caae 

 Biahop of Norwich and the Earl of Kent f Year Book,' 

 11 H.my VII... in which a jury had been asperated by a tempest 

 "while UM panics were hoing their evidence;" and one question 

 niead far the opinion of the court waa, whether, when the jury came, 

 toavtW acain. they wen competent to proceed with the oaae and to 

 The objection precaed waa that the jury had aeparated 

 ioMO wa* given ; to which it waa answered that " the 

 giving the cridewoe wa* wholly immaterial, and made the matter 

 cert her better nor wane ; that evidence waa only given in order to 

 inform the ouoacicnoea 

 but that if neither 

 BOOM! to deliver a 



About UM aamc period, that U, in the reign of Henry VII..-it 

 from record* printed in Raatell'a Entries, that demurrer* to 

 i wore an acknowledged form of proceeding, which show* that 

 at that time evidence of come kind waa given, and consequently -that 

 the character of the jury had been in com* degree changed from that 

 of mluan to that of jdyt of fact* upon testimony. The proofs 

 cntkmed in the*, record* are called tridntia; and it U most pro- 

 hable that at tint the only evidence given consisted of deed., writing*, 

 and of dcpocitioa* of absent witness** taken before the justices of the 

 peace or other magutrato., and that oral testimony wa* not common 

 until a bter period. The entire abesnce of all mention of evidence or 



worn ; a evence waa ony gven n orer o 

 cea of the jury reapecUng the right* of the partie* ; 

 party choaa to give evidence, UlT the jury would be 



. 



a* oontradiatinguiabed from juror*, in treaties*, report*, 

 record*, or etatute*. previoualy to the 16th century, strongly corrobo- 

 rate* the fact of the early character of the trial by jury. There i* no 

 trace of any rule* of evidence, nor of any positive law com|>elling the 



of witaesaea, or pnniahing them for falae testimony or mm 

 . nor of the existence of any prooee* agaiurt them before the 

 tot. 6 Eli*, c. 9 (1M-. 1 ). In the caae of Summer* r. Hoaely, reported 

 in 2 Crompton and Meaaon, p. 485, Mr. Baron Bayley aay* that he had 

 been unable to find any preoadente of the common Sbpaa>a ait tatifi- 

 of an earlier date than the reign of Eliaabeth, and expreaiee a 

 ire that thi* prooe** may have originated with the above- 

 d *Utute. The Smtpma ad UM,teandum doe* not appear in 



t.M,tca*d*m doe* not appear in 

 MM ragiatenof Write and Hronaaa* until the reign of Jamea I. ( Wort 1 * 

 ajmbok^ognphy.') WitneaM were eiamined orally upon the trial of 

 Sir Thome* More, in the reign of Henry VIII. ; but the reported *Ute 

 trial* in UM reign, of Edward VI. and Mary ahow that th* practice in 

 that reepeet we. then by no mean* aettled. In the reign of ElUabeth, 

 however, them i* abundant proof, from Hir Thoma* Smith'* ' Common- 

 wealth of England,' and other authorities, that oral testimony wa* used 

 without reeerre (except in elate proeeoution*) both in civil and criminal 

 trial. ; and oonacquently it oannot be doubted that about the middle of 

 the 19th o*ntry the trial by jury had fully aenimed the character in 

 whlih we an now familiar with it namely, an initiation deciding 

 faeta tar judicial purpoee* by mean* of teatJmony or evidence produced 

 before the jury. 

 Thie view of the original character and office of the jury 



aeem* to 



fur UM practice of fining or otherwise puniahing June* by the 

 court when they gave an nnaatiafactory verdict ; a practice which waa 

 ntinued, though not without remonstrance by legal autho' 

 the nature of the institution had been changed. If 

 arely wUnaa*** aent for to inform the court of fact* which 

 certainly to know, returned a wilfully false vcr- 



partially continued, 

 fMea, after 



fMea, 

 who 



wore guilty of a contempt of justice, and might properly be 

 hot when their character wa* changed, and tin -ir 

 not on their own knowledge of the facia, but ii].n the 

 ~ ' on their mind* by the evidence, mich a course of 

 became intolerable injustice ; and though ooca- 

 aioBal)* praetiead in the 10th century, wa. declared to be illegal aoon 

 ftor the Reotontion by the celebrated judgment in Bu*hcll'. oaae, 

 reported in Vaucfaan. Reporte, p. 110. 



The juries now m UM in England in the ordinary court* of jiutica 

 are grand juries, petty or common jurie*, and apecbl juries. Urand 

 ely incident to court* of criminal juru.iiai.-n ; their 

 c into i*Sciac* of crimee brought to them at aaaizea 

 U aaUaacd that they arc true, or at leant tl, 

 to return a bill 





the accused, upon which be U afterward* tried by tl,. 

 A grand jury moat oooaist of twelve at the la.U In practice 

 usually aarre, bat twelve must concur in finding 



every indictment No further qualification U required for grand 

 juror* (except in the case of grand juror* at the aeauun* of the peace, 

 provided for by the recent Jury Act) than that they should be free- 

 holders, though to what amount U uncertain; or freemen, law iY 

 subject*, and not alien* or outlaw*. (Hawkin* 1 * ' Plea* of the Crown,' 

 chap. 25, sect. 18.) 



Until the end of the 13th century the only qualification required for 

 petty or common juries, for the trial of iuue* in criminal or civil court*, 

 wa* that they ahould be " free and lawful men ; " freemen, as holding 

 by free service* or free burgeaaea in towns ; and lawful men, that is, 

 persons not outlawed, alien*, or minor*, but entitled to the lull |.i i\ i- 

 leges of the law of England. By the statute of Westminster 2, passed 

 in the 13th year of Edward I. (1296), it was enacted that uo man should 

 be put on juriea who bad not aome freehold of the value of 20*. a year 

 within the county, or 4(U. without it ; and this qualification was raised 

 to 40. in counties by the statute 21 Edward I, The object of these 

 tetutes was to protect poor persons from being oppressed and injured 

 by being summoned on jurie*, and also to obviate the evil of the non- 

 attendance of jurors, which frequently occurred from their inability to 

 leave their agricultural or handicraft occupations. The slut. - lleury 

 V. however waa expressly intended to secure the intelligence and re- 

 sponsibility of jurors by requiring a property qualification. With this 

 view it enacted that no person should be a juror in capital trials, nor in 

 any real actions, or personal actions where the debt or damages declared 

 for amounted to 40 marks, unless he had lands of the yearly value 

 of 40>. : and if he had not this qualification he might be challenged by 

 either party. This continued to be the qualification of common jurors 

 until the passing of the statute 6 George IV., c. 60, which repealed all 

 former statutes upon this subject, and entirely remodelled the law 

 reapeoting jurie*. By thi* statute " every man (with certain specified 

 exceptions) between die ages of twenty-one years and sixty years who 

 has within the county in which he reside* 101. a year in freehold lands 

 or rents, or 20J. a year in leaseholds for unexpired terms of at least 

 twenty-one years, or who, being a householder, is rated to the poor- 

 rate in Middlesex on a value of not less than of SOI., and in any other 

 county of not less than 20/,, or who occupies a house containing not 

 leas than fifteen windows, is qualified and liable to serve on juriea in 

 the nupiTi"r e.nirts at Westminster and the courts of the counties 

 palatine for the trial of issues to be tried in the county where he 

 resides, and also to serve on grand juries at the sessions of the peace, 

 and on petty juries, for the trial of issues triable at such sessions in 

 the county in which he resides." The exceptions are : peers, judges 

 of the superior courts, clergymen, Roman Catholic priests, dissenting 

 miiiisU-rs following no secular employment but that of a schoolmaster, 

 aerjeaoto and barristers at law, and doctors and advocates of the civil 

 law actually practising; attorneys, solicitors, and proctors actually 

 practising; officers of courts actually exercising the duties of their 

 respective offices ; coroners, gaolers, and keepers of houses of correc- 

 tion ; members and licentiates of the college of physicians actually 

 practising; surgeons, being members of one of the royal colleges of 

 'surgeon* in London, Edinburgh, or Dublin, and actually practising ; 

 apothecaries certificated by the Apothecaries' Company ami actually 

 practising ; officers in her majesty's navy or army on full pay ; pilots 

 licensed by the Trinity House; masters of vessels in the buoy and 

 light sen-ice ; pilot* licensed by the lord-warden of the cinque-ports, 

 or under any act of parliament or charter; household servants of the 

 sovereign ; officers of customs and excise ; sheriffs' officers, high con- 

 stables, and parish clerks. 



Lists of all persons qualified to be jurors are made out by the 

 churchwardens and overseers of each parish, and fixed on the church 

 door for the first three Sundays in September in each year ; these are 

 afterwards allowed at a petty sessions and then delivered to the high 

 constable, who returns them to the next quarter-sessions for the 

 county. The clerk of the Peace then arranges the lists in a book, 

 which is called the ' Jurors' Book ' for the ensuing year, and afterwards 

 delivers it to the sheriff. From this book the names of the jurors are 

 rctiiriifil in panels to the different courts. 



Special jurie* are composed of such persons as are described in the 

 .!nr..n<' Book ' as esquires, and persons of higher decree, or as bankers 

 or merchants ; and it is the duty of the sheriff to make a distinct list 

 of such penons, which is called the ' Special Jurors' List.' \\ 

 special jury is ordered by any of the courts, which must always be the 

 result of a special application of one of the parlies, 48 names are 

 taken by ballot from thi* li*t in the manner particularly described in 

 the Btatu'. . lii.-h arc afterwards re luccd to 24 by means of each party 

 -tnt,ini;i>ut 12; and the first 12 of these 24 who answer to their names 

 in court arc the special jury for the trial of the cause. 



The legitimate mode of objecting to a jury by the parties is by 

 challenge, though in modem practice thi* course is seldom resorted to, 

 having yielded to the more convenient usage of privately suggesting 

 the objection to the officer who calls the jury in court ; upon which the 

 name objected to is passed over as a matter of course without discussion. 

 Thi* practice, though a far leas troublesome and obnoxious mode of 

 effecting the object of obtaining a jury indifferent li.-t u .< n the parties 

 than a formal challenge, is, strictly speaking, irregular, and being con- 

 sidered to take place by consent, and as a 1 1\ our, < .in 

 insisted upon as a right. Challenges are of two kinds : challenges to 

 the array, and challenge* to the pollt. The challenge to the array in 



