The New era. [volume] ([Portsmouth, Va.]) 1845-1847, 1845-11-21
For the New Era.
LAW Us. JUSTICE.


Gentlemen The abuses. which grow out of
the present mode of recovering small debts up to
the amount of twenty dollars, under the existing
provisions of the law in relation thereto. call
loudly for legislative interposition They arise
chiefly from the Effectiveness of testimony, re-
ceIva6le IN cases of warrants for sums of ten to
twenty dollars, wherein the Corporation or Coun-
| ty Court has appellate jurisdiction.
AS very considerable portion of the pecuniary
transaction of the community is done through the
medium of small sums, recoverable before the
Mayor Ut City, or single Magistrate in
County; and particularly in those cases. wherein
the right of appeal is secured to the Defendant.
1t is all important for the purpose of dispensing
even handed justice to the parties litgan,. that
no new evidence to prove offsets should be adms-
slbIe before the appellate Court. except in the
absence of a material witness, whose attendance
OF deposition could not possibly have been procur-
ed, at the trial before the single Magistrate-in
which case, the Defendant should he required 10
exhibit his offsets in writing and TO make oath.
as To the materiality of the witness OF witnesses
to snbs,antate them,-a record of which should
be made by the presiding Magistrate, to be sub
mitted to the appellate Court
As it is my earnest wish to put the discrepancy
between the law, which governs the decision of
the appellate Court at present. and the demand
of Justice intended doubteSsly to be secured by
allowing an appeal to higher judicaure. in as
clear light as possible, quote at large the two
sections, pointing out the duty Of the single Mag
istrate and likewise that of the appellate Court
The Odd section of the Act passed March Cd
1919 declares, g that if either party plaintiff or
DefendanO in any suit hereafter to be brought
before any Justice of the peace, shall think him
SELL herself, or themselves grieved where the
debt or subject of trover detenue or damages
exclusive of interest shall exceed five dollars,
such party, within five DAYS from the rendition
of such judgment, may enter an appeal to the
next monthly term of the County or Corporation
Court. giving such security, as the Justice render
ing the Judgment shall deem sufficient for the
payment thereof and all costs and damages, in
case the same shall be affirmed"
| Section 25th provides I" that appeals granted
under this Act shall be tried in summary way
&C., and the Courts in rendering judgments
thereon shall goveIn themselves by the principles
of law and equity; and shall hear all the evidence,
produced by either party. whether the same was
produced before the Justice from whose judy
ment said appeal was prayed or not
And where judgment is affirmed, the same
shall be entered for the amount of the ORIGINAL
Judgment, and the costs of appeal, together with
damages after the rate of ten per centnm per
annnm upon the whole amount of the ORIGINAL
Judgment, and the costs from the date thereof
until payment and such Judgment shall be enter
ed against the principal and his security jointly
and execution thereon shall issue accordingly and
he endorsed, no security to be taken and ifthe
Judgment Of The Justice shall be reversed, The
appellant shall recouer full costs."*
The first enquiry 10 be made is, what consti-
utes the true ground for an appeal? Certainly,
in the words Of the law itself. grievance done
To the Plaintiff or the Defendant by an error or
presumed error in the judgment of the SINGLE
| Magistrate. But is it not obvious that a prey
ance may be pretended by Defendant, dissa,is
fed with the result because Of its being unfavora
BILE to him, and still the provision of the law,
would compel the sitting Justice to grant an an
! peal: or might he not be actuated by shirt Of
hostility towards the plaintiff, and desionedlv
keep back an offset, as well as the evidence ,o
prove it, with view Of burdening the latter with
a heavy cost. Such cases are not rare. To INV
mind, the question propOunded for the decision Of
the appellate Court involves apabIe ab,urdity:
viz, shall the judgment be reversed 1t is oiven
| will presume affirmativey. Now, observe nm
der the sanction Of the present law it is predi
Gated upon The hearing of ne,o mailer and ne,,
eUidence, never heard of before by the sinule
! Magistrate, who previously tried the case. and
in all reasonable probability was purposely con
cocted to be paImed on the appellate Court, in
order to shit the costs upon the plaintlf--now,
ask, is IT not ridiculous to call the different opin
ion Of ;he appellate Court, reversal Of the iudg
ment of the Court below, when this new matter
and new evidence never did or could by pnssibli-
ty have entered into the formation of that iudo
ment. II seems, that in case Of one item. how
ever nconslderable in amount is proven, (whether
the same was produced or not before the Justice y
in the adjudication Of the appellate Court, it is
sufficient to subject the plaintiff to the costs moi
withsiandIog 1t may be adjudged. he is entitled
10 the larger portion Of his debit IIeoco s,;e.e