TRIAL BY JURY.

Press, Volume LXIV, Issue 19285, 14 April 1928, Page 17

TRIAL BY JURY.

TO THE KDITOB OT THE PBSSS. Sir,—The conference of legal gentlemen now being held in the City ot Christchurch, it is hoped, has been of considerable benefit to the interests of the leg.il profession. It is evident that the interests of their clients have not '-ten tiKir cmei end. . 'there is no doubt that trial b} jury as at present constituted is patently at variance with tne fundamental right ot trial as established by the Charter oi ilritish rights—.Magna Carta which provides that the people shall have tiio right oi trial by uieu- peers. Iliere were then two distinct classes, that is l'cere and Commons—there are many more divisions of the people at the present time. This has been evident at some ot our trials and claims for damages beiore a common jury. Here there is class consciousness, especially in claims for damages for accidents. In many cases the juries are not comix? tent to grasp all the facts of complicated cases: in many cases there is class prejudice and the jury dispenses charity out of the pockets of the unfortunate litigantsOur judges, in their collective wisdom, have made some limitation in the right of trial by jury. Are they not better able to judge what is conducive .to securing justice under presentday conditions than Blackstone or Cokeand would it not be more courteous for the lawyers to approach the judges to reconsider their view rather than invite the assistance of the Legislature, as was suggested by the motion in its original form ? Was all that laudation of our judges by the legal profession as reported in the papers mere sound of hollow brass.

What is wrong with the jury system is that it is not up to date. —the panel is composed of citizens resident within a radius of .ten miles. Most of these are working men, and those who are not working men often secure exemption from duties for business reasons. .They have their own affairs to attend to. What chance is there, then, of a trial by one's peers where a company or a professional man, a farmer or owner of property, is one of the litigants? The panel is wrongly established. There should be three panels: a rural panel composed mainly of farmers, a panel of special jurymen as at present, and a panel of common jurymen. Each litigant should be entitled to indicate the panel from which half the jury shall "be selected. By this means one may, in a measure, preserve the right established under the Magna Carta. I write on behalf of the unfortunate litigants, who have been or may be parties to an action under the present jury system. The advocate in many cases chances getting a sympathy verdict. If the functions of juries were further limited, or juries were empanelled as above indicated, I venture to assert that litigation would I>e minimised. I write on behalf of that unfortunate class, and sign myself.— Youre, etc., CLIENT.