The North-Carolina standard., 1845-09-17
For the North Carolina Standard
The Administration OF Justice i'm
3 North CarOIina.-(NO.

/ nF uncertainty Oh Inc laWs OF winch We naVe
spoken, may exist as consequence either of IN
certainty in the rule itself or of unsteadness in lis
/ application. That arising from the first source
depends the power which prescrlbes the rule,
and is beyond the scope of this article. The an
certainty arising from the second source depends
on the functonaries by whom the rule is applied,
viz: in our system, judges and jurIes. AS there
is perfection in nothing human. so by no contriv-
ance can perfect certainty be secured in the ad-
ministraion of the law. 1t were desirable indeed
that all disturbing powers should be entirely re-
moved but human lnfrmities-the Incidence, ig-
norance, preudices and passions Of judges and ju-
ries-will perpetually more or less intervene to
threaten the equipoise of the scales. Both judges
and juries will always continue to be more or less
influenced by the eIoquence, the articles, or the
weight of personal character of advocates. But
| in system of administration in which the usual
| implements of counsel should derive no extrinsic
power from the peculiartes OF the system itself
while ability, knowledge, integrity, and even the
art of moving defamation, would always secure
respect and just influence appeals To- gnoble ig-
norant prejudces, and shameless assertions, would
yield success in perverting justice too small to
encourage their use or to be worthy of regard.
| We think it cannot be denied that an unusuaL
uncertainty prevails as perncious vice in our
administrative system. This unusual uncertainty
may be traced partly to the character of the per-
sons by whom the law is dispensed, partly to the
peculiar carelessness Of the mode of proceeding
For the purpose of revealing its origin more par
ticuIarly in both these causes we will take short
| VIZ of no nri0ipo1 inrisdiction IF a
large class of causes is confined TO Justices of the
peace We have due respect for this body. Here
after we shall present some reasons why the mode
of their appointment should be changed. The
greater number Of cases brought before them are
not really contested. We would not therefore d.
minish their jurisdiction in this respect subject
it is to the right of appeal which we would give
only affidavit of mertorious defence, and then
without surety. We cannot but think that the
Supreme Court erred in holding the acts extend
ing the jurisdiction of Justices constitutional since
the right of appeal which they gave, and which
was the professed ground of the decision, was
clogged with the condition of giving surety for
the result, and therefore in effect withheld from
the poor. In imitation Of recent English exam
Piles would even enlarge the jurisdiction of
Justice and make it final (by amendment of the
Constitution if necessary in all very petty cases
of contract assault and battery, of words spoken,
and of injury to personal property. To omake the
gift Of jurisdiction efectual we would deprive suit
ors in all such in the higher Courts Of costs
where the Judgment did not exceed the specified
sum {e g. 8 3oA AT present Courts and juries
are frequently occupied for hours to the exclusion
of more important business and at great expense
to somebody, with most contemplate suits.
The next higher Court to that of the single
Justice is the County Court, composed of any
three more Justices who choose to attend.
This Court has appellate jurisdiction of all cases
tried before single Justice, original jurisdiction
(concurrrntIy with the Superior Courts) of all
other civil cases, and criminal Jurisdiction of all
offences not punished by loss of life or limb. 1t
must be obvious to any observer that this Court
from its constitution, is extremely i'll adapted to
administer the law. That such was the opinion
OF the Legislature itself may be inferred from the
limitation Of its criminal jurisdiction. No reason
can be imagined why the more penal offences
were withheld from the County Court except
the greater improbabilty of lawful Judgment
there than in the Superior Courts. But are not
individuals much entitled to correct admins
tralion of the law in civil as in criminal cases
o n trials for larceny on trials for forgery ?
That the sentiment of its unworthiness is general
and growing, may be inferred from the numerous
private acts passed for depriVing it of judicial pow
ers in different counties, mostly in the west, as
well as from the appeals invariably taken from its
judgments in every case of doubt, OF interest, or
importance, where the poverty of the party does
not prevent. Long since, we believe, would it
have been altogether divested of powers so little
appropriate, but for the unfortunate indifference of
public men in general 10 any measure unconnect-
ed with party politics. and the unworthy dread of
risking popularity with the vulgar by innovations,
however wise We said we had respect for
Justices, but it is men, Justices strictly and
administrators of county concerns, not as Judges.
In effect they are appointed by the members 81
the Legislature from their several counties Too
frequently the choice is guided more by wish to
minister.to vanity which can only be felt by the
extremely ignorant or weak than by any consid-
GRAFTON of the important duties they are to per-
form: There are too many of them whose views
have never been enlarged by education, by busi-
ness, or intercourse with the world with some T
L