The Democratic sentinel and Harrison County farmer. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1851-1852, 1852-09-01
nistr.et court in JeEerson Co., 8:


District Court in Jefferson Co., o.
rREsIxr:
Rry P. RASSrY, Judge Of Sup. Court.
3Soaa' 1s,a,..o l, (, JsDShH ~, judges of the
lloBrkT I.-ALExANbEx, A~''" O''u -
Thomas Fppt vs. the State Of Ohio.
AsYiiohtiOn for tsri cf error.
Judge JEwLTr delivered the opinion of the
Court. II
Thomas Francis was indicted at the A
prifiessn. f852, OF tie court ofcommnn Pleas
s.fgeIiers rson county; pleaded guilty, and a
ine was assessed asains, him. THIS appli-
cation is Tor Il writ Of Error, 10 the Common
IDEAS ioTtrerse the Judgement The only
cause assigned for Error, is: "That the
tlouTt of CamRon Pleas, at lhe time OF in
diienient and trial. had no Jurisdiction 10 try
said eaHse. but that the jurisdiction was IN
ihesl'ress5ts court. 1t sciaiHaed by Coun-
oil f,r ule applicant, that nnder the 10th
Section, LIST Aaticle OF the Constitution, and
3ld section of the Act''deineing the juris-
Aic,ion and regulating the practice OF the
Proba Courts, 1.-The jurisdictiad for the
punishmspt 0finGeFssr Offences, is vested in
the Probate Courts, The provision Of the
(S.RstatIoa is as follows: "Exceptin cas-
t.S OF inpeaahmcnt, and cases arising IN ghe
&m7 and Navy, or in the Militia, when
an actual service in time OF war or public
danger, and in cases OF peti larceny and i'll
other inferior offences, no person shall be
laid tO answer tor capital or otherwise in
famous crime, unless on presrntment o:
indictment BY Grand Jury" The Section
.f the Probate act referred to, is as follows:
That in addition to the other powers and
jurisdiction of the Judge of the Probate
court, as provided by this act, the said court
ihaIl have jusdietion in the trial and con
Nielion of persons accused of any crime ol
misdsmuaner in the trial of which by thu
Constitution and laws of this State-presen
lnemt OF indictment by the. Grand Jury shal
not be required" 1t is conceded tina
Assault and battery is an inferior osienc(
within the meaning Of the Constitution, tha
tits competent for the Legislature to pro
,i,le for Its punishment without plesentmen
ar indictment" and that jurisdiction for trla
and punishment may be vested in courts 0
Common pleas. Has the Legislature exer
cised this power vested jurisdiction in thu
Probate court so as to bust the juristic siol
Of the Common pleas"
The act of Fchuary 10Th, 1852, relat;n!
10 the organization of courts of justice, an
their powers and duties, by the 18th Sec
lion, declares that The Common pleas sha
lave original jurisdiction Of all crimes and Of
irntes.. except minor offences, the eXclusiv
jurisdiction OF which is possessed by Justice
the of Peace, or that may be vested in court
inferior to the Common pleas, and the l8t
section Gf tie same act provides "ihat al
the laws, regulating the practice OF, and i'm
posing duties upon, or granting to the Su
preme Court or any Judge thereof, and tn
Courts Of Coxmon Pleas respectively uude
tie former Constitution, "ercept to matters Q
Probate jHrtsdjction, in force when the pres
cnt Constitution took effect, shall govern tn
prac,ic Of, and impose the like duties upo!
The District courts, and courts Of common
pleas respectively, created by the presep
Constitution.
The Courts Of Common pleas before the a
topdan of the Constitution had jurisdiction
ior tbs trial of these inferior Offences.
IT il well settled rule ofconstructon tina
the jurisdiction of courts Of general jurisdlc
lJon, can be taken away only by express ne
galive word Of statute, or by irreslstab
implication. The Court of Common plea
in Ohio, is court Of general jurisdiction =
10 Ohio Rep. SAT. Apply then this rule O
construction. The 18Th Sec. fthe Act be
fire referred to, gives to the present cour
the powers and jurisdiction ofthe Common'ple
under the Constitution OF 1902, except as t.
matters Of Probate jurisdiction" By TIL
lst Sec. it has jurisdiction except in case
of minor offences, the exclusive jurisdiction
of which is possessed BY Justices of th
Peace, or vested in courts inferior to the com
mon pleas. Now jurisdiction i'll matters O
Probate and inferior otiences,-lhe cxclus
i've Jurisdiction of which is vested in othe
courts, is alone taken away from the Com
mon pleas. "All other jurisdiction remain
-,and if we were to construe the 3rd Sec. c
the Probate act in the manner claimed b
council as grant ofprescnt jurisdiction, dis
regarding the words, cas- shall be prescriJ
ed 5y lar, :" we would still be compelled t
hold that the jurisdiction, acquired by tn
the Probate court, is not exclusive but con
current with that of the Common pleas.
the jurisdiGtion exists in both it is well exel
cised in either. But we think so far iror
the jurisdiction being exclusive in the Pre-
bate court, it is exclusive in the Commo
pleas. The clause ofthe Constitution refer
red to, permits Legislation which may dis
pence with indictments, but does not requir
l. The laws in force requiring indictment:
in force ga the lst of Sept 1851, are the
consistent with the constitutional provision
and remain in force unappealed by the sche
duie. The 3rd Sec. Of the Probate apt con
strued as grant ofprescnt Jurisdiction, DOR
fers itin cases, for the trial Of which, by III
constitution and lars of this State, present
ment or Indictment by Grand Jury sha
not bo Feeuhed.
We refer then to the requirements of tn
laws, as they existed at tho time the const
tuition took effect. Almost every offence i
the statute book, without any referaece t
grade, even a trespass upon canal lands,
required to be prosecuted by indictment i
the Common pleas. The act in relation t
the Common pleas. The act in relation t
iuries, (swan's Statute, 492, requires tn
ttrand Jury to inquire OF and present a
crimes and misdemeanors, whatsoever. Th