Eastern times. [volume] (Bath, Me.) 1846-1857, 1855-07-05

can De drawn that appeals from decisions made
under the second section, we're Intended.
BY the thirty-6rst section pfovisionlis made
that 's whenever In this act fin6 and imprison-
mem are the Fnnishment, prdvided for the of
fence charged, II shall be the duty of the JUS
ice or courttC sentence the convict to both fine
and. imprisonment This language is appIi-
cable to offences arising under the eighth sec
uon, and no inference can be drawn That it
authorized punishment 10 be inflicted for Of
fences against the second section.
BY the thirty-second section forms of
process to be used are prescribed, and it is de-
cIared that they G shall be deemed sufficient
in law, for all the cases arising under this act,
to which they purport to be adapted" Among
| these forms is one for a complaint to be made
to justice OF the peace, that the person ac-
cused, at a certain time and place g did sell
quantity of intoxicating liquors. contrary to
the form of the statute. There is also form
! for warrant to.be issued by7a justice Of the
peace on such complaint, and form for
recognizance to be taken by him in case OF an
appeal from his decision, finding the accused
guilty of such an offence. sa-g frtrf FsH
Neither of these forms contains any allega-
ton or recital of forfeiture oftwenty dollars,
or that the accused is liable to be imprisoned
for thirty days. Such allegations or recitas
are not necessary to their legal validity !; and
the omission of them is only noticed to show
that no words are used in the forms, comforting
jurisdiction to punish by imposing fine Of
twenty dollars, or an imprisonment of thirty
days. They cannot therefore infict such
punishment by virtue Of these forms. And
court cannot exercise jurisdiction over an Of
fence when it cannot infiict the punishment
prescribed for it by statute Commonwealth
u.s. Curtis. Thatcher's Grim. Gas. 2O2H ga.
BY the words shall be deemed sufficient in
law, for all cases arising under this act 10
which they purport 10 be adapted, no more is
meant, than, that they shall be deemed legal
and sufficient forms to be used in such cases
The mere enactment OF correct and legal forms
to be used for the prosecution and punishment
of an offence cannot confer jurisdiction upon
court or magistrate. If so, and the words
sone Of the justices of the peace were stricken
out of the complains, and the words judge of
probate, or, county commissioner, were inser-
ted, then Judge of probate county commits
sioner, would have jurisdiction, without any
other provision of law comforting such jurisdic-
ton upon them. The same remark would be
applicable TO the provision authorizing appeals
to be made from The decisions Of justices Of the
peace. A provision authorizing an appeal from
the decision of court in criminal cases, cannot
| give the tribunal, from which The appeal is al
lowed to be made, jurisdiction in all such
cases.
| 1t is an established rule Of law that the juris-
diction of an inferior court, or magistrate, is
never to be presumed. Ii must be clearly ex-
hbled r-r t-a,.at IL, t..-,r...,.-
| The enactments in the various sections Of the
act of 1855 do clearly show, that they were
made npon the assumption or superstition, that
municipal and police judges and justices of the
peace had Jurisdiction. If from. such enact
menls, then, jurisdiction might. be conferred
\ by implication then 1t might be, if it were
capable of proof, that the provision contained
/ in the aci of 1851 expressly comforting such jn-
risdlcon, had been originally inserted in The
act Of 1855, and had been upon deliberate con-
sideraIion, stricken Out for the very purpose OF
depriving them of such jurisdiction. Iii said,
that the intention Of the legislature to confer
such a Jurisdiction is clearly ascertalnabe from
the provisions of the act and that such inten
! ton should be made effcctnal The intention
Of a legislative bodyis by the law regarded as
/ a rule for a court to determine what constrnc-
tior the language which the legislature has
used should receive. But no role Of couslruc-
ton is known, or admitted, BY which a clearly
V
accomplish an Important purpose in criminal
law, has been can be supplied by interring
( il from language used for another purpose, not
suited nor intended TO supply that defect.
I II The intention of the legislature could be
used legally for the purpose OF making the law
what they supposed it was, and intended il
should be, Instead Of j rule of construction Ia
ascertain from the language used what enact
menlslt had really made, this difficulty would
remain that mp person can conclude, ar beleve
that The Legislature intended by the mere en-
actDent of the forms, TO give jurisdiction. The
intention TO give jurisdiction by the forms does
not therefore exist. II forms alone are relied
upon, the form Of complaint for a single sale is
not form addressed losa municipal or police
Judge, and no provision is made that such form
FOR a complaint Shall be so varied as TO make il
applicable to such Judge.
Even in the construction Of wills in which the
intention OF the testator Is TO be preemnenty
I the guide of the court, that intention cannot,
however clearly dscoverable, be made eiIectu-
al, if there be found in the will 10 language
used by which the object can be accomplished
la the case of Pickering rs. Llngdon, %
/ Me-, Alb, the opInin.: states Bat me coart
! Is not authorized 20 supply omissions BY adding
I words even for such a purpose. The intention
is one thing and the execution Of that inlen-
tion BY the testatrix, another. She must exc
cute her intentions by the use Of some language
10 give 10 the court The power to execute them
to make them effectual.' -. .. ...". MN.
II ihe.court were TO supply clear defect Of
Legislation TO give magistrates a criminal iurls-
dicrion, it would exhibit an act Of judicial leg
islstion forbidden by the constitution.
The case Of Commonwealth Us. Leach, I
Mass. SO, referred TO by the Attorney Tor the
/ Stale in this County one 10 which the lurs-
\ diciion Of the former court Of general sessions
\ in a criminal case was implied, does not au-
ihorize such a conclusion. The court held,
that jurisdiction had been conferred upon JUS
Ices Of the peace by the adoption, In that State,
of the. statues Of Edward 8, expressly conferr-
4 ing such jurisdiction. F faQ sra tlsH
/ The construction Of the law respecting the
\ punishment Of offences for selling intoxicating
/ liquors in violation Of The second section of the
act Of 1855, appears to be this. The legsla-
ture has, by enactments, provided for suitable
forms 10 be used by justices of the peace for the
punishment of such offences, and has provided
for appeals from their decisions upon the sup
position, that they had jurisdiction. That sup
position is asceuained to be wholly nnsuppor-
ted and without foundation. To hold that
those magistrates have thereby acquired juris-
diction would be to make the erroneous suppo-
siiion of legislative body the foundation, and
IL, ,uhi rh