Unquestionably the most radical treatise ever written on the American jury, examining Magna Carta and a host of other historical sources to sustain the claim that jurors should be chosen from the entire population and be judges of both fact and law . One of the earliest treatises on the subject. Spooner's powerful argument for reform of the jury system holds that jurors should be drawn by lot from the whole body of citizens, and that they should be judges of law as well as of the fact in question. Spooner [1808-1887] was well known for his controversial arguments on political and legal subjects. Spooner maintained that jurors should be drawn by lot from the whole body of citizens, and that they should be judges of law as well as of fact. Contents: The Right of Juries to Judge of the Justice of Laws The Trial by Jury, As Defined by Magna Carta 1. The History of Magna Carta. 2. The Language of Magna Carta Additional Proofs of the Rights and Duties of Juries 1. Weakness of the Regal Authority 2. The Ancient Common Law Juries Were Mere Courts of Conscience 3. The Oaths of Juror. 4. The Right of Jurors to Fix the Sentence 5. The Oaths of Judges 6. The Coronation Oath The Rights and Duties of Juries in Civil Suits Objections Answered Juries of the Present Day Illegal Illegal Judges The Free Administration of Justice The Criminal Intent Moral Considerations for Jurors Authority of Magna Carta Limitations Imposed Upon the Majority by the Trial by Jury Appendix Taxation

Considered a classic of comparative law and legal systems, this book has been twice reprinted since its first appearance 50 years ago, and is now available in a high-quality digital edition. No work has so openly and extensively—using hands-on observations by leading legal figures of the time—compared appellate courts in two common law countries. While much comparative work contrasts civil law systems with those of the common law, this study teased out substantial, impactful differences even within two traditional common law systems. The original project grew out of an intensive experiment in comparing the U.S. and English appellate courts, by which highly recognized American and English judges and lawyers met repeatedly to study and report on the appellate courts of each other's countries, with the goal of improving such courts in their own. Distinguished U.S. proceduralist Delmar Karlen of NYU then described in detail the tribunals studied, the observations of the participants, and areas of judicial administration; then he compared and contrasted appellate procedures and structures in each country, in an extensive conclusion. The work remains invaluable for legal scholars, judicial administrators, and political scientists. The 2014 ebook edition by Quid Pro Books is an unabridged and carefully proofread republication of the original NYU work (in substance the same as the 1984 and 2004 reprint editions by other publishers), adding quality digital features to enhance its present use. These features include active Contents, linked notes, linked cross-references within the book, and even a fully-linked Index that tracks the original pagination of print editions. A new paperback edition is also available from Quid Pro.

Analog Circuit Design