A boy would hardly refer a matter for decision to his little brother. Why?

Folk-Moot.--Still another common way for two boys to decide a question
about which they differ is to "leave it to the boys," some of whom are
knowing to the facts and others not. Each of the disputants tells his
story, subject to more or less interruption, and calls upon other boys to
corroborate his statements. The assembled company then decides the matter,
"renders its verdict," and if necessary carries it into execution. In this
procedure the boys are re-enacting the scenes of the _Folk-moot_ or town
meeting of our Saxon ancestors.

Boy-Courts.--Let us look at this boy-court again to discover its principal
elements.

In the first place, we see that _every_ boy in the crowd feels that he has
a right to assist in arriving at the decision, that "the boys"
collectively are to settle the matter. In other words, that _the
establishment of justice is a public trust._ So our Saxon forefathers used
to come together in the Folk-moot and as a body decide differences between
man and man. The boys have no special persons to perform special duties;
that is, no court officers. Neither, at first, did those old Saxons.

Secondly, in the boy-court the _facts_ in the case are brought out by
means of _witnesses_. So it was in the Folk-moot, and so it is in most
civilized countries today. Among those old Saxons the custom grew up of
allowing the facts in the case to be determined by _twelve_ men of the
neighborhood, _who were most intimately acquainted with those facts_. When
they came over to England these Saxons brought this custom with them, and
from it has been developed the Trial by Jury. The colonists of this