Abstract
This article pays particular attention to the Supreme Court case of Hall v Rossi and others (1830). The case is not well known but contains some extraordinary themes.5 Hall was successful in challenging three magistrates who wrongfully convicted him, a result that would have been highly unlikely without a jury (unless a magistrate was willing to convict his peers). The case also highlights the friction between the emancipists and exclusives and the way the courts could be manipulated by two men wishing to play out a not-so-private conflict. Fresh evidence is offered that by 1830 emancipists were on NSW jury lists and it is very likely that there were emancipist jurors in the case of Hall v Rossi and others. The official correspondence about the makeup of juries reveals a general apprehension about the suitability of certain men, particularly those who listed their profession as 'merchant'. It is possible that much of the concern over the finances and social standing of jurors was a proxy for concern about former convicts sitting in positions of judgement. If the government preferred to cloak its prejudice in euphemism, some rather remarkable evidence is more direct — anti-emancipist graffiti was found scrawled into the jurors' bench. Some humorous, others angry, the graffiti offers a unique insight into the minds of the jurors. Hall v Rossi and others provides a valuable case study of the significance of the introduction of jury trials for civil claims in NSW.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 43-62 |
Number of pages | 20 |
Journal | Journal of Australian Colonial History |
Volume | 20 |
Publication status | Published - 2018 |
Keywords
- Hall, Edward Smith, 1786-1860
- jury
- democracy
- social aspects
- New South Wales