Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 5.djvu/313

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.
297
HARVARD LAW REVIEW.
297

THE JURY AND ITS DEVELOPMENT. 297 agree let them be separated and examined why. If the greater part know the truth and a part not, let judgment be given with the majority." In 1292 (PI. Ab. 286, col. 2) it appeared that certain justices, four years before, had given judgment on a verdict of eleven jurymen, obtained by removing the twelfth, who would not agree. In 13 18-19, Bereford, C. ]., when the twelfth juryman on an inquest had not appeared, asked the parties whether they would agree to going on with eleven ? The reporter notes it as a question, whether this can be done by assent in "pleas of assise and attaints." 1 Fifty years later, on the taking of an as- sise, one juryman would not agree with the other eleven. The justices took a verdict from these and imprisoned the twelfth. 2 On moving for judgment, counsel urged that it had formerly been ad- judged in trespass that a verdict of eleven might be good, "and this we will show you by record." Thorpe, C.J. : "It is funda- mental (la ley fuit fondue) that every inquest shall be by twelve . . . and no fewer. . . . Though you bring us a dozen records, it shall not help you; for those who gave judgment on such a ver- dict were greatly blamed." Moubrey, J. : "Since the verdict was by eleven and judgment cannot be rendered, sue out a new inquest and let the man imprisoned be discharged." 3 The requirement of twelve in the petty jury, unless by consent, and the need of unanimity, seemed now to have become the settled rule. 3. As to informing the jurors : (a) In the first place, they were men chosen as being likely to be already informed ; in this respect, as well as others, they were a purged and selected body. I pass by the matter of precautions taken, by way of chal- len£>2 and otherwise, to keep off persons unsuitable by reason of favor to a party, or of want of property or social standing, /uways they were from the neighborhood — de visineto. This ex- pression was not precisely defined, beyond its meaning from the same county; but in practice it went much further. It became the practice to require that a certain number of the jury should come from the particular hundred in question ; and these men were expected to inform the others. In an important case of 1374, Belknap, C. J., says: "In an assise in the county, if the court does not see six, or at least five, men of the hundred where 1 Y. B. 12 Ed. II.373- 3 In 1202 (Seld. Soc. Pub. iii. case 241) one juryman differing from the eleven was fined. 8 Y. B. 41 Edvy. III. 31, 36.