Southern sentinel. [volume] (Plaquemine, Parish of Iberville [La.]) 1848-1858, 1851-08-16

against the custom Sanctioned by law of E,
ecutive wiH and faror in appointments to tn
Bench. 1t is a re,batim copy from the Donale
s%onville Vigilam:
Judgment Of Hon. J. :. Burke,
RENDERED IN THE CASE OF HENRY MCCALL Us
No. II VALERY LANDRY UPON THE ACT O.
LEGISLATURE TO PROVIDE FOR THE TRIAL OF
CASES IN WHICH THE JUDGE OF THE DISTRICT
COURTw WHERE THE AME ARE DEPENDING MAY
BE REFUSED"
IL [ach. Isl. June 1886 is necessary and proper
There is no pretext under the constitution
of Louisiana for her judges to discourse of ne
cessity, propriety oflaws. There is a seeming
licence under that of the U. S. to the fedora
judges, to talk in lutestring, under the "neces
sary and proper cause-see 8 No. l8 const
U. S.
The miserable abuses by the federal judges
of this dangerous faculty perhaps deferred the
Convention of Louisiana from similar the
adoption.
The Louisiana Judiciary cannot make a com,
pliment of the constitution to the legislature
The Legislature has, itself, with proper dignity
repealed hattery even of its own acts.
The distinction between laws odious and ia.
vorable, to narrow or extend their c%onstruc'
ton, can not be made by those whose duty it
is to interpret them; L. Z. Art. 20, of course
if the Judge can make no distinction between
odious and favorable laws, he can pay no com.
pliments to favorable laws. If he do it, it is
but vain compliment, and not authority.
2d---We are of opinion that the statute "lst
June 1876" is not unconstitutional.
An opinion is not a decision, not 'unconsti-
stutional' is not constitutional, not unconstitu-
| tional, is not enough. It must be more, it
must he constitutional, per Sc, as the act to
| change of venue also lst june 1886 under
directions of art. us. No one can dispute that,
| even the decree admits it, tho without cour-
tesy of compliments to its necessity or proprie-
ty.
1t needed none. 1t has constitutional, on its
fronts piece, and holds its title in its hands, art.
lis. That is an instance of an act c~onstitu-
tional, under direction of the constitution.
There may be others, under permission of the
COZ stitution, not so consummate as that under
din. rtion. These others may be in the class of
mot unconstitutional
But in what category fall those without d.
rection? without permission? of the c~onstitu-
ton, such must be extra, constitutional er VI
termini.
The decree falls short Of even asserting the
act, Ito refused cases.
Constitutional, and incidentally acknowled-
ges its Enthusiastically by the apologize phra-
ses, also not constitutional of necessary and
proper. What does any body think of a con-
stitutional proposition that cannot be stated in
constitutional language?
3d.-Art. SO, no duties or functions shall
ever be attached by law to tine supreme or dis
trict courts but such as are judicial "this pre-
supposes the very case" Il. e interchange recu-
sation] which =? both ? to the district court ? re-
strictedly :! ATTIC the supreme court : who not?
That too is involved in the proposition and in
the function, Judicial, May the Legislature d.
rect the S. c. too. to interchange! recusa-
tiou? s'This seems to be the only restriction
file. Judicial except those defining their juris-
diction-sThis seems is a delusion, really there
are many others then those precised.
The proposition is not critically correct.
But taken as it is, it admits exceptions defining
iurisdiction-Then art 95 required the Judge to
reside, what for ? if not for Jurisdiction? by art,
SO the judge may 60 throughout the state and
some say he can 60 clean out of it) and he may
have jurisdiction throughout the state, that
of conservator of the peace. Thus he must
reside within the district, for jurisdiction, ordi-
nary, the unique exception for a specific extra
ordinary jurisdiction out Of it, jurisdiction Tor
all purposes in the district, and out of it, for
one only.
Ifthese impressions are hypercritical what.
the proper one These? That the constitution
by investing the Judge with all jurisdiction
within the district, conferred them all through
out the state, Or, This! by comforting one ju-
risdiction throughout it invested all the juris-
dictions throughout the state? The very im-
personation Of effrontery would be abashed
to utter such in ineffable absurdity and yet
this ~egeigions blunder, lies lurking at the bot
tom Of this subject matter.
The decree admits exceptions, other restric-
tons defining jurisdiction, but it does not de-
fine its own position, what exception? what
class of exceptions !? admitted? "
Jurisdiction l. is not an abstraction, it has va
rious reflection two at least, and the decree
seems to have contemplated a third the a.
mount or, rather that only,
l Time, the judge of the 9Th. on LIST Mon
day in June.
2 Place, at Baton Rouge,
8 Amount whatever not less $50.-The LIST
mondayin August, out of time, Donaldsonyille,
out of place; S49, out of amount all extended
of jurisdiction For art IS
confined him to the 9th district (of which Ba
ton-Rouge) place, Judiciary article, empowered
the Legislature to fix on lst Monday
time-and art. 10 not less than $50 amount.
The inquiry was intensely, uniouelny, of jul
r;edict;nn Ineal 10 shan1d tho iudoo nf tho 9Th
sit in the 4th. not inquired at all when! nor of
amount. The decree not clear it does not ex-
plain it is understood to have looked to the
amount only, its Impressions is a palpable err
ror, however whether thought that jurisdiction
had but one phase. The amount or, that hav-
ing two, the place also, that, the amount was