904 Sheet – American State Trials 1918 Volume X Leo Frank Document

Search for:

Reading Time: 3 minutes [383 words]

Here is the translated text as follows:

As challenging as the task may be, I shall offer a few observations to show that they have this right. I intend to defend Mr. Callender by establishing two points.

First, a law contrary to the Constitution is void. Second, the jury has the right to consider both the law and the facts. It seems to be universally acknowledged that when the legislature exercises a power not granted by the Constitution, the judiciary will disregard their acts. The second point, that the jury has the right to decide the law and the facts, appears equally clear to me. In exercising the power of determining law and fact, a jury cannot be controlled by the court. The court has the right to instruct the jury, but the jury has the right to act according to their judgment. If they find contrary to the court's directions and the law of the case, the court may set aside their verdict and grant a new trial.

In the Jouvep Case, courts do not claim the right to set aside the verdict in criminal cases.

Mr. Nicholas: From this right of the jury to consider law and fact in a general verdict, it seems to follow that counsel should be permitted to address a jury on the constitutionality of the law in question. This brings me back to my initial position: if an act of Congress contravenes the Constitution of the United States, a jury has the right to declare it null and refuse to give it the efficacy of a law. Believing it to be contrary to the Constitution, they will not convict any man of violating it. If this jury believes that the Sedition Act is not a law of the land, they cannot find the defendant guilty.

The Constitution secures to every man a fair and impartial trial by jury in the district where the fact was committed. To preserve this sacred right unimpaired, it should never be interfered with. If a precedent is ever established that allows the court to control the jury to prevent them from finding a general verdict, their important right—without which every other right is of no value—will be impaired, if not absolutely destroyed. Juries are to decide according to their understanding of the law and the facts.