|Previous||1 of 1758||Next|
Full-size archival image
Loading content ...
March 22. BILL OF RIGHTS. 87S excuse me. geutlenH?n of tlie committee, I thought 1 was addrenstng a Jury of twelve men. Centlemen of the Convention, we should hesitate a longtime before we take this first ImiKirtant step tit our Jurisprudence. It seems to me thnt we are not tlie ones that have discovered this great secret that nine can render a verdict, but thnt If It was of great advantage, an It Is represented by tliegeutk-men upon the other side, other men framing their constitutions must have discovered the secret In-fore thin. I think If there Is uiiy one time when thin Convention ought to follow tin? precedent of all aires, this In tbe time. It scents to me that we can not do better than adopt tls? nyntcm thnt all tin- states in the Union, following the old common law. have adopted- Now. gentlemen of the Jury [laughter], there In a reason why twelve men are ln-tter calculated to render n verdict tlmn k-sn than twelve men. and I nm gointf to give you that reason. We were asked to give a reason yesterday for It. ami I am going to give it to yon. Men's minds are constituted differently. No one man thinks as bin nelghln.r din*.. Take any twelve men upon this floor, no one will Bjve exactly the name reaaoa tor his Judgment that another man will give. Now. sir. the ex|n?rlenee of men. the experience of courts, have taught us that where there an- twelve men together, twelve different nilndn reasoning ii|H>n the --'ini- proposition, they will arrive at a better conclusion, ami a more satisfactory conclusion, than nine or lens than that, anil I believe that that In the secret. We have twelve different views of the proportion that In In-forelbe court and before tlie Jury and the views of twelve men uulte In a con- cciinun of one view upon tls? final verdict. Tls- verdict then will express tls? opinion of twelve men: Uh-twelve men will have different reason- for tl*?lr views; each man will have til- own reason, ami It seemn to me that I bin Is a thing that we should follow. I do not believe that we should he the first to take this Important step, and I am opposed to It and I am going to stand for the old common law Jury system and vote that tbe Jury slmll tie twelve and that nine can render n verdict; and the reason thnt 1 am willing to vote thin way Is because if we allow nine to render * verdict nnd not make It unanimous, we remove the three- It in possible sometimes that In any Jury there may Is? corrupt Influences brought to ln?ar upon the Jury and that Influence may infect one or two. or three men. but It in very rarely that It will ever go to a£h«t four men on the Jury. And that. 1 In-lleve. l-wliy the verdict nhould In? by nine anil not a niuiulmoun verdict, and ■ nm In favor, gentlemen, of the projsMillion of Mr. Varlnn. Mr. CHEER. Mr. Chairman, for Information of the gentlemen. I wish to read from tbe ronntltutliin of Wyoming to show that we would not In? the first to entabllnh this precedent M Indicated by the gentleman from Salt Lake. "Tlie right of trinl by Jury shall remain In- vlolnte In criminal case*, but a Jury In civil case* lu all c.iurt*. or In criminal rases In courts not of record, may consist of haw than twelve men. as may be prescritn?d by law." So we would not Is? the first to break the established order. Mr. PIERCE. Then I take that back. Mr. WHLI-H. Mr. Chairman. I desire also tocalt the gentleman's attention to the fact that that section asreimrted by the committee Is the Identical language of the constitution of the state of Washington, that provides for a Jury of k-sn than twelve In courts of record, ami for a verdict of nine or more Jurors In criminal cases In any court of record. Mr. THl'RMAN. Well. If I am not mistaken, Mr. I'lialrmnn. thin In the WOret mlntake I ever made In my life. If I .nn mintaken In what I now nay. I nhould In? In Provo mire. and. nlr, [laughter) a mis- east of tlie bank cor-
|Agency||Statehood Constitutional Convention (1895)|
|Caption||Official Report....Volume II. Star Printing Company, Salt Lake City, 1898.|
|Source Container||Reel 5|
|Source Relation||Series 3212 | Statehood Constitutional Convention (1895) | Records | Official Report....Volume II. Star Printing Company, Salt Lake City, 1898.|
|Conversion Specifications||Mekel Technology Mach V Microfilm Roll Scanner. Quantum Scan vs 1.0. Quantum Process vs 1.04 as TIFF 200 PPI greyscale, processed with Adobe Photoshop CS2 and saved as JPEG.|
|Rights Management||Digital Image created in 2012 by the Utah State Archives, which is the custodian of the original records from the Statehood Constitutional Convention (1895).|
|Holding Institution||Utah State Archives|
Utah. Constitutional Convention (1895)
Utah--Politics and government--1895.
|Abstract||In July 1894, the U.S. Congress enacted a law to enable the territory of Utah to be admitted into the Union as a state. The act spelled out the calling of a convention composed of 107 delegates to meet beginning in March 1895 to draw up a state constitution. These records are the papers of that convention.|
|Project||Utah Territory Project|