The Hawera Star. WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 16, 1929. AMERICAN JURY SYSTEM ON TRIAL.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 16 January 1929, Page 4

The Hawera Star.

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 16, 1929. AMERICAN JURY SYSTEM ON TRIAL.

Delivered every evening by 6 o’clock in Hawera, Manaia, Normanby, Okaiawa, Eltham, Mangatoki, Kaponga, Alton, Hurleyville, Patea, Waverley, Mokoia. Whakamara, Ohangai, Meremere, Fraser Road. and Ararata.

v The United States, like some British countries, is beginning to have its doubts that the jury system of criminal trial is invariably irreproachable. It is strange that that country should only now be stirring itself to question some of its more common forms of judicial procedure, for there are several features of the American method of I dispensing justice which appear to be palpably in need of overhaul. .For instance, in a celebrated case in California it took ninety-one days to select a jury, while in another case in Chicago 4821 jurors were examined to get the 'necessary dozen, with a cost to the people of 13,000 dollars. Jury trial means so much delay and expense that soin. G members of the American Bar are asking if similar results could not be accomplished by other and more efficient agencies. Air Henry W. Taft, of New York, is not the only leader in the legal profession who regards trial by jury as being frequently “cumbersome, unnecessarily protracted and unduly expensive.” It is regarded as- a happy sign that a number of investigators are now rummaging about among American legal institutions and that current magazines are publishing their findings, frequently devoting their attention lo trial by jury. Jury trial, they say, has always been more extensively used in America than in •England —too widely used, perhaps. The New York Crime Commission, for example, reported that only one out of fifteen trials for graver offenses had jury trial in England in 1925, and that the ratio was one out of eight in all trials on indictable offenses. “The jury seems to be disappearing from English criminal law,” the commission announced, going on with a broad hint that it might disappear in the United States as well, so far as the control of crime goes. The movement to abolish juries has serious support behind it. Others declare that if juries are to remain, at least the system of trial should be improved, and the method 1 b. e employed more sparingly. For ex- ! ample, in Canada it is now the exception for a civil case to go before a jury, tin the United States juvenile courts 1 the jury has been eliminated, as it has lalso in many jurisdictions in misde- ' meant)r cases. A few states now permit a majority of a jury to give a verdict in civi^cases and do not insist on unanimity, while a growing number of states permit the waiving of juries in civil cases. Only two states —(Maryland and 'Connecticut —make it. perjmissible to waive jury trial in criminal (cases. The result has been highly satisfactory in these instances. In Con|nootieut juries have been waived in 70 (per cent, of the cases, and in Alaryland in 90 per cent. It has been found in these states that justice suffers no hardship and that cases arc expedited, with the courts able to get through about twice as much work; in other words, a trial with a jury takes twice as long as one without. Perhaps the various other faults for which juries are blamed could be overlooked, bill this matter of delay goes deeper. The keynote \of the present era is celerity, and the jury, as much as any other single cause, is attacked for jamming

the court calendars. It is not justice when cases are held up, as stated of the Supreme Court of New York County, till nearly 30,000 jury cases were pending, and a case cannot be reached for twenty-two months. 'Similar delays are not' umtnown in many of the cities of the country. Proposed improvements in jury trial include a greater strictness in granting exemptions from service; a curb on the tendency to make the trial judge a mere umpire unable to comment on testimony and fact, in effect most expert' and impartial person in court; a-nd a reform of the ritualistic code of procedure. It is admitted that the jury certainly shows no immediate sign nf disappearing at present, but at the same time its use is growing less frequent, and the trend seems to be toward speeding up justice without lowering its quality.