The constitution of the governor’s court and of the supreme court, is liable to the same objection. They are both composed of the judges, who have each a vote in their respective courts, and of two members specially appointed by the governor: so that none of those causes of challenge which are held sufficient in this country to disqualify a juror, are of any validity in the courts of this colony. In the governor’s court, indeed, the two members are to be appointed from among the respectable inhabitants; but, although the governor himself is the only judge of the measure of their respectability, he could not well avoid selecting them out of that class which in case of the introduction of trial by jury, would have a right from their property and character to be summoned as jurymen. In this court, therefore, an individual in a trial with the crown, would have a much greater chance of obtaining justice than in the supreme court; because the two members of it are to be appointed from the magistracy, and might be selected by the governor from their known zeal and corrupt devotedness to his service. But it is of infinitely greater importance that the decisions of this latter court should be the less exposed of the two to the possibility of bias; because in the former the injury which an individual could sustain from an unjust verdict could only amount to L50, and in the latter it might extend to L3000, and consequently