xpect, however, to hear of him in a day or two.
Monsieur le Comte de la Luzerne has resumed the department of the marine
this day. Either this is an office of friendship effected by Monsieur de
Montmorin (for though they had taken different sides, their friendship
continued), or he comes in as a stop-gap, till somebody else can be
found. Though very unequal to his office, all agree that he is an honest
man. The Count d'Artois was at Valenciennes. The Prince of Conde and
Duke de Bourbon had passed that place. T. J.

LETTER II.--TO M. L'ABBE ARNOND, July 19, 1789

TO M. L'ABBE ARNOND.

Paris, July 19, 1789.

Dear Sir,

The annexed is a catalogue of all the books I recollect, on the subject
of juries. With respect to the value of this institution, I must make
a general observation. We think, in America, that it is necessary to
introduce the people into every department of government, as far as they
are capable of exercising it: and that this is the only way to insure a
long continued and honest administration of its powers.

1. They are not qualified to exercise themselves the executive
department, but they are qualified to name the person who shall exercise
it. With us, therefore, they choose this officer every four years.
2. They are not qualified to legislate. With us, therefore, they only
choose the legislators. 3. They are not qualified to judge questions of
law, but they are very capable of judging questions of fact. In the form
of juries, therefore, they determine all matters of fact, leaving to the
permanent judges to decide the law resulting from those facts. But we
all know, that permanent judges acquire an _esprit de corps_; that being
known, they are liable to be tempted by bribery; that they are misled
by favor, by relationship, by a spirit of party, by a devotion to the
executive or legislative power; that it is better to leave a cause to
the decision of cross and pile, than to that of a judge biassed to one
side; and that the opinion of twelve honest jurymen gives still a better
hope of right, than cross and pile does. It is in the power, therefore,
of the juries, if they think the permanent judges are under any bias
whatever, in any cause, to take on themselves to judge the law as
well as the fact. They never exercise this power but when they suspect
partiality in the judges; and by the exercise of this power, they have
been the firmest bulwarks of English liberty. Were I called upon to
decid