Recently, I was reading the first ten amendments of the American bill of rights and was struck by the variance in the number of rights granted by each particular amendment.
For example, the first amendment contains the freedom to speech, press, religion, assembly, and petition while amendments four, five, six, and seven (and 8 to some extent) are four separate amendments all of which are related to the rights of those accused of a crime, e.g, the sixth amendment is the right to a speedy trial and the seventh amendment is the right to a jury trial.
Now, if the freedom of religion and the freedom to petition can make it into the same amendment, it seems strange that the right to a jury and the right to a speedy trial should warrant two separate amendments.
Is there a historical reason that the bill of rights contains this imbalance?
I should add that the third and second amendment, while also quite specific, do not have an obvious grouping and so I am not surprised that those two are presented separately. Regarding the ninth and the tenth amendments, I do not understand the ninth amendment well enough to have an opinion about it and the tenth amendment seems appropriately distinct from the others to warrant its own number.