Fayetteville observer. [volume] (Fayetteville, Tenn.) 1850-1966, 1854-01-05

the eq4ity of the case, the lar Of the
case. Taking the bill Of rights as
the fou hdation for our courts, the in
quiry very naturally arises as to
whether our courts, as now establish
cd, under the sixth section, first arti.
Ole Of 4he constitution, are in con-
formity with the principles herein
laid down This a rticle, says, "the
judicial power of the State, shall be
vested in one supreme court, in such
inferior courts as the legislature shall
ordain and establish" This provis-
ion of the constitution would seem to
give great latitude to the Legislature
in the organization of the courts
But the exercise Of this power by
the Legislature must be in strict con-
formity with the, principles laid doSp
in the bill Of rights. The bill Of
rights being the better part of the
constitution, is paramount. I
III all questions Of apparent con-
tllct between the bill OIL rights and
the constitution, they should be re-
conclled and made to harmoniZe, il
possible; but where there is a final
repugnance, the constitution must
give way, it bearing the same rela
ton to the bill Of rights that law
does TO the constitution. Hence,
in the organization of the courts, tile
legislature has no authority under
the sixth article, to depart from this
great a id fundamental princi-
pie, as laid down in the bin Of rights,
or the better part Of the >constlu-
ton.
Under the constitution of 1896,
judges Of the supreme and inferior
courts were d ppoipted by The legis-
lature to Office, during good behav-
ior. The legislature conferred up
on the courts chancery and law
jurisdiction, which was exercised
by them for thirty.eigEt years, or
Till 1885. The people, after ma
king this experiment, bee anne " ell
satisfied that our judicial system
was exceedingly defectlv e. falling
far short OF carrying out the great
principles, as contemplated in the
bill OF rights.
In 1881, the people again, in con-
SO changed the CD Institution
as to make il more in conformity
with the idea OF right and justice,
by changing the tenure of all judi
clal officers from thai Of life to
term OF years, and at the same time
referring back many other elections
TO themselves which had been CIV
en- up in the constitution Of 1876.
These changes ID the constitution
AVE. been effected, i'll part, for the
purpose of conforming the courts OF
he country. in their whole strucl-
Ire, to the wants aud necessities of
he people. There has been evident
dissatisfaction with the c purls of
he country Tor a number Of years
'ast. The people find fault with
he judges, complain of the lawyers,
md sometimes condemn the Jurors,
llording conclusive evidell ce that
here is wrong somewhere G. De-
ay, expense and PerpleXity of mind
n the part OF the litigants conf I
ence in The courts much impaired /
n the public estimation. Under
ur present system, an individual
oes into what is termed a court Of
NV, TO obtain justice in some mat
e. OF controversy, and after much
me is spent and expense incurred,
0 comes ont OF law with a long bill
t cost TO pay, and il he complains
f the proceeding, he is told that bis
ase was good one, but he was
Unfortunate in bringing his action
the wrong court, that his RENE
yls not in law, but in chancery.
Another individual brings his suit
a court OF G hancery, and after d
Ike delay of time and trouble i'll
Ilng bills and hearing ans " ers, he t
Turned out Of court with a long t
II OF cost and charges TO pay, and 4
: is consoied in the same way by c
Hing him his case was a good one, Il
1t his remedy is not in chancery, t
ltin a court of law, there being
, equityin his case; and in this way t
rites are kept oscIllating from a k
urt of chancery to d court Of law, "
I'd from IA court of law TO a court a
chancery, until, in the end, if the b
d ever comes, the substance of b
e parties is, in many instances, k
nsu ned, and the gainer olthe suit 81
frequently the loser; and the IN CO
'tunate party goes into immedi-e al
: bankruptcy. This is the man tt
T. i'm which law and comfy Is AL 81