same high platform in society as one who had never been suspected. Many complaints were therefore made, as had been remarked, which were not sustained; and most of them would never have been made before a magistrate. ny, cross-examine and sift it, explain it if possible, learn the mode of attack to be made upon him and prepare to meet it? Would any member wish the grand jury system applied to himself in such a case? If not, why did he wish to furnish it to others? It had been said that the accused might escape into a neighboring state, and could If there was any tendency in the grand not be brought back-a requisition could jury system to rescue an innocent man from not be obtained without the intervention of the disgrace of a public accusation, it would a grand jury. The case, said Mr. S., pre- be something in its favor; but the fact is sented no difficulty. If a criminal escaped, otherwise. There was no secrecy except the remedy was clearly marked out by the the modus operandi, the particular mode of laws of the United States. No indictment conducting the proceedings in the grand was necessary—a requisition could be ob- jury room; about results there was none. tained on proper affidavit. The grand jury were sworn to secrecy, He was opposed to the but the witnesses were not, and the miscause it was a secret one. It was an anom-called secrets of the grand jury room were aly in judicial proceedings. The publicity blazoned to the accused and the world. of courts afforded the best guaranty of their purity. Because, if prejudice, or partiality, or corruption existed, the world would see the indications of it. But in the grand jury room, like the inquisitions of the star chamber, all was enveloped in darkness. institution be He was further opposed to the institution, because under it the accused could not expect an examination in conformity with the rules of law. He was examined by men, generally substantial and intelligent, but who did not possess, and had too much good sense to pretend to possess, a large amount of legal knowledge. Hear say evidence, parol evidence of the contents of records, and other irregularities were naturally to be expected. We have been, said Mr. S., solemnly warned that we were stepping upon dangerous ground-that we proposed a great innovation-that no other state had gone to this extent. An innovation it certainly is, but one which had recommended itself to the judgment of the most substantial and practical men of the state, and had found distinguished advocates in some of the principal legal periodicals of the land. We were told that in this measure, if it succeeded, we should take the lead. And why should Michigan shrink from taking the lead in a great measure of reform? She had occupied that position before. She was among the first to abolish imprisonment for debt: she was among the earliest to pass a The grand jurors, said Mr. S., were se- homested exemption law. Would she wish lected almost at random from the mass of to blot these facts from the page of her their fellow citizens; the magistrates were history? No! they were and always would elected with a view to their knowledge of be regarded by her with satisfaction and judicial affairs. Again, the proposed sys- pride. Abolish this institution, and instead sys-pride. tem was vastly better for the accused. He of being a source of mortification and dismight confront his accusors and cross-ex- grace, he had no doubt that this also would amine witnesses; he had the means provi- be contemplated with just state pride. ded to enable him to prepare for trial. Circumstances that appeared dark and suspieious upon their face, he might, perhaps, be ready to explain. Mr. J. D. PIERCE said: Mr. Chairman, I am decidedly in favor of abolishing the grand jury system, and I have no doubt the people of the state approve the measure. It is now a useless, burdensome institution. More men are blackened by it than are protected by its operation. Mr. S. appealed to the intelligence of members of the Convention, whether, if they should be accused of any infamous crime-and there was no man so elevated When first instituted it was of value. that he might not unjustly be suspected- Then the king, by his fiat, could send the whether they would prefer a secret ex parte man to his creatures to be tried to the examination, or choose to hear the testimo- I dungeon, and to death. Then it was that ry to guard his life, liberty or property, upon the one hand; and upon the other, to insure the arrest, prosecution and punishment of real violaters of the law. Such, sir, has been the opinion of mankind for centuries such was the design of the Barons of England, when, sword in hand, they wrest the grand jury came up, and placed itself between the monarch and the subject. To the latter it afforded some protection. But the occasion which gave it birth has passed away. We have no king to frown to send a man to his court to be tried and executed. Besides, sir, the grand juis a burdensome, useless expenditure-ed from an arbitrary and tyrannical British it is a waste of time and money, and there monarch the great charter of British libis no advantage resulting from this institu- erty. Sir, its objects and its effects, like tion at all commensurate with its cost. The the habeas corpus act, were to secure the great purpose of it can be better obtained citizen against the tyranny of the governwithout than with its continuance. It is ment; and the experience of centuries in wholly ex parte in its action, and often England, and in our own country, has fulworks great injustice. A neighborhood ly demonstrated the fact, that in its operaquarrel is kept alive, and brooded over tions it has not only fully met the objects until the grand jury is convened, and then, of its original creation, but has conduced, perchance, the originator and perpetrator in an eminent degree, to prevent the comof the wrong may go forward and swear mission of crime, as well as to insure the his neighbor under indictment, punishment of offenders. The grand jury, sir, is more of the nature of an inquisition than any other institution of our country. The system is at war with the fundamental principles of liberty-that every person charged shall be at liberty to confront the witnesses. In the grand jury room this is denied. I go, therefore, for abolishing the system-for cutting it up, root and branch, trunk, twig and leaf. Mr. HANSCOM said: Mr. Chairman, I have listened with much surprise to the proposition to abolish the institution of the grand jury; and the arguments adduced in support of the proposed innovation upon the administration of criminal law, are, to me, of a most novel and extraordinary character. But, sir, it is urged by gentlemen that it creates unnecessary expense. I, for one, do not believe it. Experience and observation convince me that in points of economy it is preferable, far preferable, to any plan proposed in its stead. Once abolish grand juries, and every conceivable case has to undergo a legal investigation and trial before a committing or examining magistrate, before the party charged can be put upon a final trial before a traverse jury. Grand juries obviate, to a great extent, such an evil; as it is only in the most aggravated cases, or when there is danger of the party charged escaping, that complaints are made and examinations had; and, sir, it will take but a few criminal examinations I had supposed, sir, that the design and where counsel are employed, and witnesseffect of a grand jury was to subserve the es called, and contests had, to create an ends of public justice to secure the prompt, amount of expense greater than is incurred efficient, impartial and independent admin- by the entire sitting of a grand jury. Take istration of the laws of the land, and at the any of the more populous counties of our same time to guard the rights of the citi-state as an illustration. From twenty to zen and secure him against unfounded ac- fifty indictments may be found at a single cusation. But we are gravely told by gen- term, and that term not extend beyond tlemen on this floor, and even by the gentle- three or four days. In view of the meetman from Calhoun, [Mr. J. D. PIERCE,] that ing of this body no complaints have been grand juries are engines of oppression, and made no expense incurred, no criminal tend to outrage private rights-create un-examinations had. necessary expense, and hinder and delay But, sir, there are considerations conthe punishment of crime. Such arguments, coming from a gentleman of his extensive reading and general intelligence, could only be listened to with astonishment. I had supposed, sir, that grand juries were one of the shields thrown around the citizen nected with this subject far more important than that of mere economy, public security, the protection of the private citizen, the additional safeguard thrown around him, and the actual punishment of the real offender against the laws. Suppose, sir, But, sir, it is charged that the tribunal is a secret one, and that by its existence it is placed in the power of a vindictive and unscrupulous enemy to procure the indictment of the innocent. Such cases may have occurred, and doubtless have; but, I venture to say, not successfully occur. red as often as have prosecutions of such a character before examining magistrates. As a general rule, the men composing our grand juries are possessed of sufficient intelligence and integrity to detect and counteract the designs of the malignant prosecutor or complainant. But, sir, is the substitute proposed (and the only one) free from still more serious-yes, ten fold more serious objections? A single magistrate, and he perhaps leagued in feeling and design with this vindictive complainant perhaps ignorant as well as knavish, binds over or commits the innocent citizen for trial. The public prosecutor has no discretion-the case must go to a court of record for trial, and the party charged is subjected to all the consequences that would follow an indictment found by a jury of his fellow citizens. Mr. Chairman, I look upon this attempt to abrogate this time honored institution as a most dangerous innovation; and I am fearful that the consummation would be fraught with most evil consequences; and until something is proposed in lieu of it some plan by which the great ends designed to be accomplished by grand juries, can be attained--I shall oppose their abrogation. It is not unlikely that evils have grown up in connection with their organization that call for a correction; and none will be more ready than myself to aid in ridding the system of what is bad, and throwing every guard around it that shall be calculated to guard against abuses and prevent the possibility of negligence, as ap plied to the government, or of injustice towards the citizen. Mr. H. moved to pass over the section, so that after the committee should report the article back to the Convention, he would move to recommit it to the committee with instructions so to amend the 9th section as to confer power on the legislature to provide by law for the trial of civil causes by a less number than twelve; and to authorize a jury of a less number than twelve in courts not of record, and for the trial of misdemeanors, in any court, by a number less than twelve. Also, so to arrange the 10th and 11th sections, either by the substitution of an additional section, or otherwise, as to provide for indictments and presentment by grand juries in all cases where the offence charged would be punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary. He believed the opinions of members had Mr. CHURCH opposed the proposition. He believed the opinions of members had been matured on the subject, and they were ready then to vote on the question. If there was any one subject on which they agreed, it was not to sanction the present grand jury system. Mr. J. D. PIERCE thought the question There was no had as well be met then. object in recommitting, or passing it by. Mr. S. CLARK enquired to what committee it was proposed to recommit. Mr. HANSCOM-The committee on the Bill of Rights. Mr. S. CLARK said it would be useless, except under special instructions. Mr. HANSCOM withdrew his motion. Mr. SUTHERLAND then moved to amend as follows: the words "and in all civil cases in which Sec. 10. Line 3. Amend by striking out personal liberty may be involved, the trial by jury shall not be refused." Mr. S. said that section 9 preserved the right of trial by jury inviolate, and if so, the words he proposed to strike from section 10, were mere surplusage. The motion to strike out was lost. Mr. TIFFANY moved to amend section 10, line 2, by striking out "to be confronted with the witnesses against him.' Mr. S. CLARK said, that proposition was before the committee. They consi dered it highly important that a party and see what their own wants demanded, The amendment was lost. Mr. HASCALL moved to amend by adding at the end of the section, "nor shall any person be called to answer for any criminal offence on the presentment or indictment of any secret or ex parte tribunal." The amendment was withdrawn by Mr. Mr. SULLIVAN moved to amend section 10, by adding the words "the institution of the grand jury is hereby abolished." Mr. McLEOD said he wished to make an experiment. He moved the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again. "Lost. Mr. COOK moved to pass the section over. He wished to have further time to Mr. CHURCH remarked that in the case of a fugitive from justice, the proceedings consider the matter, as it was of vast imagainst him must necessarily be ex-parte.portance. Mr. MORRISON, to avoid that difficul- Several other members having expressty, moved to amend the amendment by ex- ed a desire to have time to consider the cepting the cases of fugitives from justice. subject, section 10 was passed, and section Mr. CRARY said he was not prepared 11 taken up. at that time to vote for or against the proposition. By the vote already taken, the grand jury system was not abolished. All that had been decided was that future legislation should not be tied down by constitutional provisions. Under the constitution, as it now stood, the system had been cumbersome and expensive. It required the grand jury to have cognizance of too many offences. Mr. CRARY moved to amend by striking out of line 1, all after the word "person," to and including the word "punishment," and inserting, "after acquittal, shall be tried for the same offence." Mr. C. said he considered the language used in the section indefinite, and his amendment merely proposed language more definite and better understood. The amendment offered by Mr. CRARY By the action of the committee thus far, drew out some discussion as to the conthe question was left open to future legis-struction placed by the courts on the phrase lation. If the committee wished to go fur-"twice put in jeopardy;" when ther, all that was necessary was to intro- Mr. J. BARTOW moved to amend the duce a naked proposition to abolish the amendment by adding after the word "acgrand jury. They might proceed without quittal," the words "upon the merits." hesitation to do so, if such were the will of the people. The institution had been called ancient and venerable. This was not so in its present form; and there was no institution so ancient, or so venerable, but he was ready to raze it to the ground, if upon careful examination it was found to be useless. On motion of Mr. DANIELS, the committee rose, reported progress and obtained leave to sit again. The Convention then adjourned. WEDNESDAY, (9th day,) June 12. The Convention met at 8 o'clock A. M., and was called to order by the President. Prayer by the Rev. Mr. TOOKER. Roll called, and members all present except Messrs. McCLELLAND and WHIPPLE, absent on leave. Action thus far had been safe-it was left to future legislation to abolish the system, or regulate it to meet the wants of the age and the demands of our institutions. If, however, the Convention wished to abolish, they could safely do so. It had been done to a great extent in some of the other states, and could be done in this, if the public sentiment is prepared for it. In all their action they should look arounded the following: The journal was approved. REPORTS. Mr. REDFIELD, from the committee on State officers, except the Executive, report ARTICLE Of Stute Officers. years, and one for six years. The Board of State Canvassers shall, on the first Mon.1. There shall be a Secretary of State, day in January next succeeding such gen Superintendent of Public Instruction, a eral election, meet at the Capitol and deState Treasurer, who shall be ex-offi- termine by lot which of said inspectors cio Commissioner of the Land Office, shall hold his office for two years, which an Auditor General, and an Attorney for four years, and which for six years. General, elected at each biennial general And there shall be one elected at each election, who shall hold their respective general election thereafter, who shall hold offices for the term of two years, and shall his office for two years. perform such duties as may be prescribed by law. The article was read a first and second time by its title, and referred to the committee of the whole and ordered printed. Mr. KINGSLEY, from the committeë 2. The terms of office of the incumbents to be elected under the foregoing provisions, shall commence on the first day of on the seat of government, submitted the January, 1852, and of every second year thereafter. 3. Whenever a vacancy shall occur in any of the above mentioned State offices, the Governor (by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, if in session,) shall fill the same by a temporary appointment, to continue until the office can be supplied by an election, at such time and in such manner as shall be provided for by law. following: ARTICLE Of the Seat of Government. The seat of government of the State shall be in the township of Lansing in the county of Ingham, where it is now located. And the same was read the first and second time by its title, and referred to the committee of the whole. RESOLUTIONS. On motion of Mr. BEARDSLEY, Resolved, That the committee on the judiciary department be instructed to inquire into the expediency of prohibiting appeals and certioraris, and of providing for new trials instead thereof; and also as to the propriety of making a second verdict or judgment in favor of a party final and irreversible in all cases. 4. The Secretary of State, State Treasurer and Auditor General shall keep their offices at the seat of government, and shall constitute a Board of State Auditors, for the examination and adjustment of all claims against the State, not otherwise provided for by law, or specially referred by the Legislature to some other tribunal. And shall also constitute a Board of State Canvassers, for determining the result of all elections for Governor, Lieutenant Go- Resolved, That the committee on townvernor, Judges and State Officers, and of ships be instructed to inquire into the exsuch other elections as shall by law be re-pediency of abolishing the offices of as + ferred to said board. On motion af Mr. CORNELL, sessor, commissioners of highways, and directors of the poor; and empowering the Legislature to provide for the election of a supervisor, township clerk, and treasurer, who shall, together with the oldest justice of the peace, constitute the township board and board of elections, and who shall perform such other duties as shall be prescribed by law. 5. In all cases of two or more persons having an equal and the highest number of votes for any office, as canvassed by the Board of State Canvassers, the two Houses of the Legislature, in joint convention, shall choose one of said persons to fill such office; and in all cases where the determination of the Board of State Canvassers shall be contested, the two Houses, in joint convention, shall direct Resolved, That the committee on educawhich person shall be deemed to have tion be instructed to inquire into the probeen duly elected. priety of reporting a constitutional amend6. Three inspectors of the State Prisonment which shall forever prevent the Legshall be elected at the general election which shall be held next after the adoption of this Constitution, one of whom shall hold his office for two years, one for four On motion of Mr. WELLS, slature from enacting any law relating to the university and school lands, unless such law is general in its application and effect. |