Actually, it was your second sentence that caught my attention: there seemed to be an assumption there that the jury was somehow a part of the state, and while that is so at present, unless thinking individuals wisely make other arrangements, I thought it worthwhile to set forth some alternatives that have worked in other times.

Lest we think there is a necessity to toss out the jurors with the government-employed judges. :-)

I hope this helps.
Thank you very much for this excellent commentary, by the way!
ilo