The Jury That Refused the Judge
Three Tacoma jurors face contempt charges after defying a court order to deliver a verdict they claimed went against their own judgment.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
In Tacoma, three jurors were held in contempt of court after refusing to return a verdict ordered by Judge Pritchard. The judge had directed the jury to find for the plaintiff, H. A. Fisher, arguing that the case involved only points of law and no disputed facts. Jurors C. A. Jones and others dissented, declaring that they did not consider a verdict for the plaintiff justified. Despite being reprimanded by the court and threatened with thirty days in jail, the jurors maintained that while they would comply with the technical order of the court, they wished to explicitly state that the verdict was not their own. The court has now directed the prosecuting attorney to file contempt charges against the men.
“Mr. Fisher wanted to comply with the technical order of the court, and at the same time he desired to announce that that verdict was not by any means his verdict.”
Jury nullification remains a controversial and rare tool in modern American law, often used when jurors believe a law or its application is unjust. This 1894 incident highlights the historic tension between judicial authority and the independence of a jury, a struggle that still echoes in debates over how much power citizens should have to check the state's reach.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.