In a critical colonial test of jury independence, Andrew Hamilton for the defense seeded a community values view of the jury in the New York Supreme Court in the 1735 Zenger case
, establishing that the jury was, first, to try the case as neighbors: "The law supposes you to be summoned out of the neighborhood where the fact is alleged to be committed; and the reason of your being taken out of the neighborhood is because you are supposed to have the best knowledge of the fact that is to be tried" (Alexander 1963, 75).
While I will most likely continue to teach the Zenger Case
as a landmark step towards press freedom, Nord's interpretation can certainly be woven into the more standard interpretation, as it probably should be.
I think the Zenger case
illustrates that if the government, or some part of it, tramples on the rights of the people, it is the lawyers who have the independence and courage and resourcefulness to resist.
McManus' review of Quest of a Hemisphere ("Quest for True American History," October 21st issue), there is an error regarding the John Peter Zenger case
Because those invocations almost invariably turn to the 1735 trial of John Peter Zenger for seditious libel, the Zenger case is a useful reference point.
The details of the Zenger case are less important than its milieu, which was defined by a nearly archetypal battle between arrogant ruler and indignant subjects.
1963) (summarizing the Zenger case as a preface to the 1963 reprint of James Alexander's account of the case); see also LEONARD W.
Grow up and remember your high school civics lessons where you should have learned a little about the Peter Zenger case
, which gave light to the need of the First Amendment.