LXVIII.
MYSTERIES OF THE GRAND JURY.
SITTING ON A GRAND JURY.—HOW IT IS COMPOSED.—PECULIARITIES OF MODERN JUSTICE.—HOW TO SELECT BLOCKHEADS.—A DISHONEST BAGGAGE-MAN.—CHARITY AND MERCY.—AN AFFECTING INCIDENT.—SAVING A YOUTHFUL OFFENDER.—A GENEROUS WOMAN.—CURIOUS PHASES OF HUMAN NATURE.—CELT AND AFRICAN.—STORIES OF THE DETECTIVES.—A GARRULOUS IRISH WOMAN.—FAMILY TROUBLES.—THE HORSE AND CART STORY.—HOW A PRETTY WOMAN CAPTURED THE JURY.
It was the fortune or misfortune of the writer to be called to sit on the grand jury of the Court of General Sessions in New York, in the latter part of the year 1871. Like most of my fellow-men, I had no great fondness for jury duty, and made efforts to be released. I was politely informed that there was no escape, and that I had better do cheerfully what I could not avoid. And so I did it. I sat on that jury, or rather in a cane-seated chair in the jury-room, for fifty-eight days, some of them pretty long ones. It was my first experience of the sort, and I learned more about criminal matters than I had ever known before. A man who sits a month or two on a grand jury can have a reasonable excuse for accepting the doctrine of the total depravity of the human race, or, at all events, of a considerable portion of it.
GRAND AND PETIT JURIES.
What is the difference between a grand jury and a petit jury? To many persons, and probably to most, this question would be an insoluble riddle. Everybody who knows anything worth mentioning is aware that a petit jury, in a criminal court, consists of twelve men, who are sworn to well and truly judge of the guilt or innocence of the accused tried before them. They are to weigh the evidence given in open court in presence of the accused, and when they agree upon a verdict, and are ready to return it, they stand and look upon the prisoner, who is instructed to stand and look upon them. To find a verdict, the twelve must be agreed; and thus it often happens that an obstinate man can “hang the jury,” and prevent the rendition of a verdict. Obstinacy may arise from various causes and motives, generally honest, but not always so. Sometimes the jury is equally divided in opinion—six men being of one mind, and six of another; sometimes a verdict is the result of a compromise, which includes a recommendation to mercy, or a verdict for a lower degree of criminality than is charged in the indictment. In civil suits, where a question of damages or compensation arises, the result is often obtained by taking the figures proposed by each man, adding them together, and dividing the amount by twelve. But in criminal cases no such system of average can be employed. Very often the persistence of a single juror will save an offender from immediate punishment, and allow him a new trial—which frequently means no new trial, but a discharge on his own recognizance. And sometimes the obstinate juror attributes to his comrades the inability to find a verdict. The story of a western juror is frequently used to point a moral or adorn a tale. “I was all right,” he says, “and we might have settled the thing straight off, if the other eleven hadn’t been the most pig-headed fellows you ever saw.”
DEFECTS OF JURY TRIALS.
One requirement of the practice in our courts is, that in a criminal case no member of a petit jury shall have formed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the accused. In cases that have not acquired notoriety, this does not materially interfere with the selection of a jury; but in a case that has attracted general attention, like that of Foster, or the assassins of President Lincoln, several days may be spent in finding twelve men without opinions. The rule was adopted long ago, when there was no general diffusion of knowledge, and when there was no daily chronicle of events accessible to everybody. On a matter of great importance and general newspaper discussion, it is next to impossible in these days that an intelligent man should have no knowledge or opinion; to demand an opinionless jury in such a case is practically to demand a jury of blockheads. It may well be doubted whether, in this country of electric telegraphs and lightning presses, the old practice is the best. The object of trials by jury is to protect the innocent and punish the guilty. I think I utter the sentiment of most thinking men, in saying that for my part I would rather, if wrongfully accused of a crime, be tried before twelve honest, intelligent men, who believed me guilty, but whose opinion could be changed by evidence, than before twelve ignorant men who had formed no opinion about me. But if I were guilty, and desired, as most criminals desire, to escape justice, I should clamor for a jury of such of my fellow-men as could not entertain an idea without having it thrust into their heads with an auger. Many a scoundrel has evaded his just deserts by means of a jury of “twelve good men and true,” whose intellects were hardly equal to those of an educated horse.
But a grand jury encounters none of the difficulties that beset a petit jury. The law requires that it shall be composed of “intelligent citizens of good character,” who shall be qualified to serve as, and not exempt as, petit jurors. Their names are selected by lot, the same as employed for the selection of petit jurors, and each man selected is notified by the sheriff of the county. A grand jury is composed of sixteen as the minimum, and twenty-three as the maximum number. Twelve must concur to find a bill or to dismiss a complaint. No vote can be taken unless there are sixteen grand jurors present; whether there are sixteen or twenty-three present, or any number between the minimum and maximum, there must be, as before stated, twelve to concur in determining the ordering or rejection of an indictment. Other votes, such as for adjournment and the like, are taken by majorities, in the same way as in other deliberative bodies. The accused never appears before the grand jury, and only one witness can be called into the room at the same time. The district attorney may be present during an examination, and at the request of the foreman may conduct it, but he cannot be present when a vote is being taken.