CO129-026 - Bonham - 1848 [9-12] — Page 141

speaking men of wealth and education, and with many of whom I am on intimate terms

James and for whom I have a high respect. I would not, therefore, wish to be understood as representing the Grand Jury as forgetful of the sanctity of their oath, but I still do think it not impossible that, their interests being much mixed up in the question, they have

10

identified themselves with the system, to have a strong bias, of which they are unconscious and of the strength of which even themselves may be unaware.

The second reason is their entire ignorance of the duties incidental to the Office of a Grand Jury. The Members that compose Grand Juries are, at least, half of them, Scottish Gentlemen, and in Scotland Grand Juries are unknown; the remainder are Gentlemen, many of whom have been for years residents in China, and perhaps there would not be more than two or three of the whole Panel who ever sat on a Jury out of China. The Admiralty Jurisdiction was only introduced into the Colony in January 1847, since which period only seven Grand Juries have been assembled. I think I am therefore not speaking disparagingly of the Grand Jury, when I assume that the duties are not very familiar to some of them, indeed I may say to any of them.

A reference to the Chief Justice's charge to the Grand Jury, as reported in the Gazette, will serve to inform your Lordship that it was not one that could enlighten the Jury on the subject of their duties, although it certainly was a peculiar case and one on which I conceive it was more than ordinarily necessary that a Jury should have been instructed. This is, however, My Lord, a delicate subject for me to touch upon,

512-1

and I should possibly have refrained from doing so, did I not conceive that for the ends of justice...