THE ANGLO-SAXON AND ROMAN SYSTEMS OF CRIMINAL JURIS PRUDENCE. By M. Romero, Mexican Minister to the United States. ' I HAVE often heard, during my official residence in Washington, comparisons made between the Anglo-Saxon and Roman systems of criminal jurisprudence, generally very disparaging to the latter system, and this leads me to believe that our own, which is based on the Roman, is not quite well understood in this country. This, and not a desire to indulge in odious comparisons between the two systems, is my apology for writing a brief article intended to show that our system is not so defective as some be lieve. I think that in doing this I render a service to the good understanding between the United States and its Southern neigh bors. This subject has always had a great in terest for me. Having been educated at home as a lawyer, I have desired to study and practically to compare the various sys tems of jurisprudence of different countries, believing this to be one of the best ways to understand the philosophy of that science. I regret, however, that the public duties which have devolved upon me during my whole life, and my long absence from home, depriving me of the opportunity of practic ing law in Mexico, have prevented my be coming better acquainted with all its pro visions and making a specialty of the study of jurisprudence. The same cause has pre vented my studying fully the practical workings of the Anglo-Saxon system of jurisprudence, as existing in the United States. It is therefore with great reluctance that I approach such a difficult subject, be lieving, as I do, that I am not fully compe tent to treat it as thoroughly as I should like.
While I would not attempt to depreciate the Anglo-Saxon system of jurisprudence, I think the Roman system is also entitled to some regard. The most remarkable of the Roman institutions, and the one which we might say survived the downfall of the Ro man Empire, and the incursions of the bar barians with their feudal system, was the. civil law; it contains all that was best of former ages and peoples. The advancement of old Etruria, the wisdom of Solomon and Lycurgus, the principles of the legislation of Minos, and all that was of permanent value to Egypt, Phoenicia, Chaldea and the fore most nations of the ancient times, were in corporated into the laws of the ten tables, which were engraved four hundred and fifty years before Christ; and therefrom was de veloped the wonderful legal system which culminated in the institutes of Justinian in the year 534 of our era, a system which did more than anything else to assimilate to the Roman Republic the many dissimilar nations which became its provinces, and which were held together by the wonderful Roman civil law. The Roman law was really the result of freedom and free intellectual de velopment, carried on during several centu ries under the benign influence of republi can institutions. On the other hand, the common law was the natural result of the feudal or military system of the northern barbarians. The foundation, therefore, of the one is justice; the basis of the other is brute force. THE JURY SYSTEM.
It is generally considered that the corner stone of the Anglo-Saxon criminal juris prudence is the system of trial by jury; and
' This article was originally published by the North American Review of New York City for July, 1896. The present edition has been revised and somewhat added to by its author. — Editor's Note.
