Whitehurst v. Davis, 3 N.C. 113, 2 Hayw. 113 (1800)

April 1800 · North Carolina Superior Court

3 N.C. 113, 2 Hayw. 113

Whitehurst vs. Davis.

^JpHIS trac a 'Cavéáh It had been tried by a jury on the pre-raises, who had giveíi á verdict, which the county court had cor.fiyjuieíl. A writ of error was brought, and the error assigned was, that it had been tried by IS jurors. Cro. C. 414, and Trials Per Pais, 70, were cited.

Per :;urhhi.

Qu.r constitution declares, that in all controver-ri-s at law inspecting property, the ancient mode of trial by ■Jury, is otic o' the best securities of the righto of the people, and ought to remain sacred and inviolable. It may be said, if :AS concur in a verdict, 12 must necessarily have given their assent. Bit any innovation amounting in the least degree to a departure frena the ancient mode, may cause a departure in Other inzlraces, and in the end, endanger or pervert this excellent inst'ifr.roa from its usual course ; therefore no such innovation should be permitted.

'¿'he judgment was reversed and a new trial ordered.