Page:History of Australia, Rusden 1897.djvu/631

felony not punishable with death, remission of sentence ratified by the king,—left the convict eligible, "because such offences create no disqualification, but only incapacity of the offender so long as he is deprived of his liberty. But persons convicted of perjury under 5 Eliz. c. 14, could only by Act of Parliament be restored to eligibility, and those convicted of transportable offences accounted infamous (such as perjury at common law, subornation of perjury, and forgery in some cases), who had not received free pardon, would not be held eligible in England; nor would those convicted of infamous offences below the degree of felony and not transportable, of the nature of the crimen falsi.

With this opinion no man quarrelled. But with the earlier and more sweeping verdict of Forbes many were discontented. Although the local juries were at that time confined to civil issues, it would be difficult to exaggerate the heart-burnings which were created in the community. What! an untainted man sit to dispense justice by the side of an emancipated felon! Flesh and blood would not endure it. Mr. Robert Campbell, jun. (although his father supported Forbes in many matters), protested from the jury-box against the disgrace. He was overruled; but the moral sense of the community recognized that he had reason on his side when the notoriously shameless were seen seated arrogantly by the side of the reputable. The advocates of the emancipist party were driven to allege that, in order to discredit the class, the framers of the jury lists included its specially unworthy members.

A singular phase of opinion was observed for many years. There was a preference amongst litigants for military juries. Their probable ignorance of commercial affairs was assumed to be counterbalanced by their sense of honour and superiority to undue influence. But the leaders of party discarded such considerations. They seized every occasion to increase the rancours which existed. Once when a military jury had concluded its labours, and a civil jury entered the box, the new-comers found that their predecessors had made offensive inscriptions aimed at emancipist jurors and Judge Forbes. Complaint was made, the unknown libellers were censured