"Every ward had its proper alderman, who was _chosen_, and not imposed by the prince."--_Same_, p. 4, _text_. "As the aldermen, or earls, were always _chosen_" (by the people) "from among the greatest thanes, who in those times were generally more addicted to arms than to letters, they were but ill-qualified for the administration of justice, and performing the civil duties of their office."--_3 Henry's History of Great Britain_, 343. "But none of these thanes were annually elected in the full folcmote, (people's meeting,) _as the earls, sheriffs, and head-boroughs were_; nor did King Alfred (as this author suggests) deprive the people of the election of those last mentioned magistrates and nobles, much less did he appoint them himself."--_Introd. to Gilbert's Hist. Com. Pleas_, p. 2, _note_. "The sheriff was usually not appointed by the lord, but elected by the freeholders of the district."--_Political Dictionary_, word _Sheriff_. "Among the most remarkable of the Saxon laws we may reckon * * the election of their magistrates by the people, originally even that of their kings, till dear-bought experience evinced the convenience and necessity of establishing an hereditary succession to the crown. But that (the election) of all subordinate magistrates, their military officers or heretochs, their sheriffs, their conservators of the peace, their coroners, their portreeves, (since changed into mayors and bailiffs,) and even their tithing-men and borsholders at the last, continued, some, till the Norman conquest, others for two centuries after, and some remain to this day."--_4 Blackstone_, 413. "The election of sheriffs was left to the people, _according to ancient usage_."--_St. West._ 1, c. 27.--_Crabbe's History of English Law_, 181.] CHAPTER V. OBJECTIONS ANSWERED The following objections will be made to the doctrines and the evidence presented in the preceding chapters. 1. That it is a _maxim_ of the law, that the judges respond to the question of law, and juries only to the question of fact. The answer to this objection is, that, since Magna Carta, judges have had more than six centuries in which to invent and promulgate pretended maxims to suit themselves; and this is one of them. Instead of expressing the law, it expresses nothing but the ambitious and lawless will of the judges themselves, and of those whose instruments they are.[73] 2. It will be asked, Of what use are the justices, if the jurors judge both of law and fact? The answer is, that they are of use, 1. To assist and enlighten the jurors, if they can, by their advice and information; such advice and information to be received only for what they may chance to be worth in the estimation of the jurors. 2. To do anything that may be necessary in regard to granting appeals and new trials.