Found this article
Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 4:58 pm
I was surfing the net and I found this article. It was off the website Lizzie Bordeb: Warps and Wefts. Title of the article was called "A Flaw in the Jury System", and it was written by Lucy Stone and it was in the Newport Mercury, June 1893. Here goes"
"James W. Clarke in the new Yourk Recorde, discussing the present jury system, makes the following sensible suggestion in behalf of a woman juror in casess where a woman is on trial. Another jury reform suggest itself in connection with the Borden jury. Here is a woman put upon trial for her life, accused of a crime the allege motive for which was a malicious enmity of long growth against her stemotherk, with the principal witness against her a woman -- the whole case from beginning to end enveloped a womanly atmoshpere, and attended by circumstances of a domestic nature, of which the jury, I know that the law as it stands does not permit the presence of a woman on juries; but why not change the law, and correct another anomaly-- to my thinking on of the greatest anomalies-- of trial by jury as it exists today? The old commmon lay theory of the jury was that everyt accused person had right to be tried by a jury of his peers or equals, drawn from the vicinity where the crime charged against him was committed. The centuries'old liberty has the right to have equal sex represtation on the jury that is to pass upon her guilt or innocence. Slowly, perhaps, but surely , th eidea is growing thta a jury ought to be composed of men and women, and that woman especially should have a jury of her peers, not her soverigns, as in the case of Lizzie Borden. LUCY STONE.
I have always thought she should had a woman on the jury, but the woman probably would have either sympathic to her or railed her over the coals. Whereas, a man back then, might have had a hard time believing a woman could have done such a thing.
And, it also made me realize how far we have come since the 1980's.
"James W. Clarke in the new Yourk Recorde, discussing the present jury system, makes the following sensible suggestion in behalf of a woman juror in casess where a woman is on trial. Another jury reform suggest itself in connection with the Borden jury. Here is a woman put upon trial for her life, accused of a crime the allege motive for which was a malicious enmity of long growth against her stemotherk, with the principal witness against her a woman -- the whole case from beginning to end enveloped a womanly atmoshpere, and attended by circumstances of a domestic nature, of which the jury, I know that the law as it stands does not permit the presence of a woman on juries; but why not change the law, and correct another anomaly-- to my thinking on of the greatest anomalies-- of trial by jury as it exists today? The old commmon lay theory of the jury was that everyt accused person had right to be tried by a jury of his peers or equals, drawn from the vicinity where the crime charged against him was committed. The centuries'old liberty has the right to have equal sex represtation on the jury that is to pass upon her guilt or innocence. Slowly, perhaps, but surely , th eidea is growing thta a jury ought to be composed of men and women, and that woman especially should have a jury of her peers, not her soverigns, as in the case of Lizzie Borden. LUCY STONE.
I have always thought she should had a woman on the jury, but the woman probably would have either sympathic to her or railed her over the coals. Whereas, a man back then, might have had a hard time believing a woman could have done such a thing.
And, it also made me realize how far we have come since the 1980's.
