The Texas Republican. [volume] (Marshall, Tex.) 1849-1869, 1851-03-08

probation OF tho constitution and say It IA
thus written and not within the power Of
the Courts or the Legislature TO alter IL.
But we think there are reasons that might
have operated opon the minds Of the fra.
mers Of the constitution in thus limiting the
Jurisdiction o, the District Court, or rather
denying he right Of appeal from Magis.
iratc's Court.
Al suits, complaints, aud pleas, where
the amount in controversy equalled one
hucdrcd dollars are given to the District
Court. sec. 10th leaving controversies Of MI
inferior amount to the Justices jurisnic.ion.
1t was necessary for the speedy adninistra.
ton of justice that different courts should
take jurisdiction Of different subjects All
more important matters were given 10 the
District Court For the hearing Of causes
arising ont Of contracts, when the amount
involved was lsss than $1,000, the consti-
tution provided for the appointment Of
n convenient number OF Justices OF the
Peace for each county, which number
could be increased ~ the wants Of the
community demanded. art. 1, sec. IL.
Thus parties litigant could have their cases
heard and their rights adjudicatcd in con.
vcnient, cheap, aud expeditions manner.
To guard against any injustice that might
result from tue caprice or prejudice Of the
magistrate, either party might demand
trial by jury, art. 4. sec. Is; as n further
check upon the action Of such courts in
misconstruing or misapplying the law, the
District Courts or the Judges thereof are
authorized TO issue such writs ns may give
thcia General superintendent and con.
,rol over be proceedings. II the Justice
oi 4 Peace has erred Ia the discharge OF
his duty. II DC has unsupported the law. IL
be has adm ed iisY9rope, OF excluded prop.
or evidence 'pnn such showing being
made 10 lao district Couf or to any II
tho Judges thercof, hc would have the
power to issue writ, bringing up the pro-
cccdings Of the justice for revision and
correction. For this purpose the wit OF
certiorari ia full and ample.
Now would not the object of the con.
siitution be defeated by granting as right
tees Court. The smaller amount in.
volvcd, the more expensive and the more
tedious would be the proceedings at law,
il this construction IL to be given 10 the
constitution. When the amour. exceeds
one hundred dollars, when it Is often tens
Of thousands, the parties eau have but one
trial by jury; when the amour, is ten dol.
lars the party may If he chooses have two
trials by jury, thus increasing the impor.
tance oil this great tribunal in an inverse
ratio. When the amount involved is large.
party is subjected to the celays and cA.
pcnses incident to one court, when il is
small he must necessarily follow it through
two.
ii an appeal is to be allowed MS right
from the Justice Court without there being
any error apparent upon their proceedings
then party in that court may neglect its
mandate. may refuse to appear. may
Withhold his evidence and thus let the judg
ment OF the court go against him. then re-
move it 10 the District Cou, and there by
n defence that he might As well have made
in the Court below, reverse its Judgment
and throw his adversary in the costs OF
both courts The history of the trials OF
appeals IN the District Court show that this
is very often the case aud the dockets Of
those courts instead OF being liglhencd by
the division OF business, Is crowded by ap.
peal cases, to the exclusion OF the original
cases
Can it be possible to suppose that the
trainers of the constitution Intended 10 give
TWO trials by jury in cases ol an inferior
amount or rather was it not its intention
simply to give the District Court supcrin-
,cndcucc and control over inferior tribunals
to correct the errors Of law.
There IL no possible ease in which par
tv eau be prcjudiccd This being the con
s,ruciion oi the cousitution,l il he attends
TO his business, j. he appears in the Nagis.
tsa,c's Courts, as he should, prepared with
his dcfenses and his evidence.
II either are improperly excluded, If he
is forced to trial with good cause for II
continuance, in short il any errors are com
mittcd. such facts can be noted upon the
Justices docket and upon application to the
District Court, the case can be removed ior
its revision and scmanded for trial II neees
sary with its instructions. The District
Court then. il is true, would exercise appel
late jurisdiction, sub nodo, that is it would
exercise general supcrintendencc and con
troll over inferior jurisdictions. to keep them
within their proper limits, to see that the
law is correctly applied. but with this i'm
por.an, qualification. that the District Court
or the Judges thereof are not required to Is
Sue writ until il is shown allirnatsveIy
that there il u necessity 10 do so. Ia order
r 10 control the Inferior court until il II
shown that the inferior court has erred nn.
rs 20 render il necessary for that court Ia
su,erintead and control it, aud with this
further qualification that the issues OF Fact
would not he tried in the U;.irict Court, ~
that the object Of the constitution in organ
hing inferior courts and limiting the juris'
diclion oil the District Courts would not bt
defeated.
We have no answer for the argument at
sbsurdum that the Justices Of the Peace
would bc incompetent 10 present cases
tried before them, for the proper rcvisiot
Of the District Court. II that il the fact
which, however, we do not believe il 10 be
We could with ~ much I,ropfic,y urge Il Al
an argument why this court should deprive
magistrates Of all power whatever 10 r.,
caascs; IL they arc not NJ for cne, shey an
/ certainly not ior tho other.
Ticrc wsa no error ia refusing the nr
pal bond b. tho Jussice Of The Peace.
The other errors alleged IN The proceed
iars before the Juslics al ths Peace are no
well takes. Considerable allowance mus
b. made In these caseA The Jssiices o
, the Peace ara generally snsk'llsd |" III