in France, in Italy, Austria, Turkey, and Spain. But I must speak of some special things in the conduct of some of these persons—things which ought to be looked at on such a day as this, and in the light of religion. Attempts have lately been made in this city to destroy the juror's power to protect the citizen from the injustice of government—attempts to break down this safeguard of individual liberty. We have seen a judge charge the grand jury, that, in case of conflict between the law of God and the statutes made by men, the people must “obey both.” Then we have seen an attempt made by the government to get a partial jury, who should not represent the country, but should have prejudices against the prisoner at the bar. We have seen a man selected as foreman of the jury who had previously, and before witnesses, declared that all the persons engaged in the case which was to come before him “ought to be hung.” We have seen a man expelled from the jury, after he had taken the juror's oath, because he declared that he had “a general sympathy with the downtrodden and oppressed here and everywhere,” and so did not seem likely to “despatch” the prisoner, as the government desired. This is not all; the judge questions the jurors before their oath, and refuses to allow any one to be impannelled who doubts the constitutionality of the fugitive slave law. Even this is not the end: he charges the jury, thus selected, packed, picked, and winnowed, that they are to take the law as he lays it down; that they are only judges of the fact, he exclusively of the law; and if they find that the prisoner did the deed alleged, then they must return him “guilty” of the offence charged.
I am no lawyer: I shall not speak here with reference to usages and precedents of the past, only with an eye to the consequences for the future. If the court can thus select a jury to suit itself, mere creatures of its own, what is the use of a jury to try the fact? See the consequences of this decision, that no man shall serve as juror who doubts the constitutionality of a law, and that the jurors are not judges of the law itself as well as the fact. Let me suppose some cases which may happen. The Constitution of the United States provides that Congress shall not prohibit the free exercise of religion. Suppose that
