No directions can legally be imposed upon there by any court or judges; an honest jury will thankfully accept good advice from judges, as their assistants; but they are bound by their oaths to present the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, to the best of their own, not the judge's, knowledge.
He argues that juries cannot be legally directed by judges and must adhere to their oaths.
Share
More from Lysander Spooner
Why should they not have such an administration of justice as they desire, and can understand?
It was simply, that they would neither convict the innocent, nor acquit the guilty.
But there is no reason why a judge should have the power of punishing, for contempt, any more than for any other offence.
They cannot claim or expect that the whole people shall practise the folly of taking on trust their pretended superior knowledge, and of committing blindly into their hands all their own interests, liberties, and rights, to be disposed of…