The Daily clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1866-1888, 1867-02-28

|
rors and Appeals Covering the
Recent Act of the Legislature
Relative thereto.
The passage by the Legislature OF an act
entitled ''An act to provide for the holding
Of the High Courtof Errors and Appeals OF
the State Of Mississippi, and for other pur-
poses,n approved Feb. 81, 1867, changes ma
terially the course OF proceeding In the
| Court, and rendersit necessary for u.s. before
we separate, 10 express our views Of the OPP
Grafton Of the act, as well for the guidance
Of the Clerk, rs for the Information of coun-
sci and parties interested
The act alluded to divides tho State into
| four Districts and requires that a term of
| this Court shall DO held once in each year,
| in each Of these districts and IL provides
| that all cases in such districts, which may
be carried to the High Court Of Errors and
Appeals, after the act shall take effect, from
any Of said districts, shall be directly trans
mitted 10, and heard and tried in the Court
so held for the district from whence said
cause may come respectively, and tried and
determined as now required ,by law. The
act takes effect from and after the first Mon
day of April 1867.
The duty Of the Court in the regulation of
its practice, under the laws prescribed by the
Legislature, makes it incumbent on us to
construe this act, and to declare what bus
mess is to be transacted at the several terms
appointed by it.
The act assumes to regulate and provide
for the holding of this Court, and it requires
four terms to be held In each year at the
times and places named. This noc ,ssarly SUI
persedes aud abolishes the present terms,
and the regulations now existing for shc
dispatch OF business and It's q remarkable
omission that ii supplies no method what
ever OF disposing of the business already de-
pending: There is nothing contained in the
act that positively forbids the Court to take
up, at any of the new terms, cases not
arising within the district in which the
Court may be sitting. But the affirmative
language used, and its general scope and OBJ
ject seem to indicate purpose to restrict
the Court to the trial of causes "ca,yied' to
it from tho particular district and hence
the inquiry arises, whether such purpose,
if it existed on the part of the Legislature,
can be carried into effect consistently with
the conditions of the Constitution, which is
the paramount law; binding alike on the
Legislature and the Court.
Before the late amendment, the 9TH sec
ton of the 4th article of the Constitution,
was in these words: "The High Court of
Errors and Appeals shall be held twice in
each year, at such place as the Legislature
may direct, until the year 1886, and after
wards at the seat of government Of the
State"
This clause was always interpreted
as requiring ticO terms of the Court
to DO held in each year, for the
dispatch of all the business pending
in the court, from,all portions of the State
1t was considered to be the constitutional
right of every suitor to have his cause called
at every term of the court, and tried and
determined, unless continued for good cause
Under this section, the legislature, for the
convenience of parties and counsel, appoin-
ted the particular days in the October term,
ON which the business coming from each of
the general districts should be taken up,
and required the court to fix three days for
the April term, and to give public notice
thereof But all the causes pending in the
court were required to be called at some
time during every term.
The amendment adopted in 1865, strikes
out the section above quoted, and substi-
tutes the following: "The High Court of
Errors and Appeals shall be held at least
once in each year at the seat of government,
and at such other place or places in the
State as the Legislature may direct"
This new provision still requires that at
least two terms of the court shall be held in
each year; one of which, at least, shall be
at the seat of government, or both il the
Legislature shall see proper, and one of which
may be held elsewhere. And the Legislature
is authorized to increase the number of terms
at discretion, and to direct at what place
they shall be held, provided one term shall
be retained at the seat of government. On
I'll ese points there can be no boubt
But the question we have to consider is
whether, when the terms are appointed and
the placed fixed at which they are to be
held, it is competent for the Legislature to
divideup the business, and parcel it out so
that at each term only portion of the
pending cases can be taken up ? If the
affirmative of this proposition can be estab-
lished, then it is clear that the requirement
of the constitution that there shall be at
least two terms of the court in each year,
can be successfully evaded.
Itwould hardly be commended, we suppose,
that under the constitution as it stood,
before this amendment, it would have been
for the legislature to provide
that, at one of the terms then required to
be held, the business from one part of the
State only should be taken up, and that the
be tried at the other term. That would NOT
have been holding two terms in the sense of
the constitution, but one term only, Sucb
a law would therefore have been unconsti-
tutional, and it would have been the duty
of the court to disregard the restriction, and |
to proceed at every term to dispatch ali the |
business before it.
This court, whenever it meets, is the High
Court of Errors and Appeals of the whole |
State, for the decision OF all causes depend. |
ing therein. There must be at least two of |
these terms in each year, and as many more /
as the legislature may think demandedby the /
public good. The more frequently the terms
are held, the more the interest and convent
ence of thep people is promoted. But if the leg
stature can so sub-divide the court as to con
inc its action at any term to the business of
particular counties, all the advantages of
frequent terms would be lost, and we see
nothing that could prevent them, by multi
plying the number of these subdivisions
beyond the number of terms in q year. and
the cases in each to be taken up
n rotation, from producing the result that
he business of particular districts might be
Icted upon only once in number of wears
The principle would be the same; and if n
uitor can be deprived of his right to be
leard at one of two terms held in single
ear, he might, by parity of reasoning, be
eft with only the right to be heard once in
everal years.
The prompt and speedy administration of
ustice. under the law, is ca lina1 object
f all government. This principle is incor-
orated in our fundamental law, by the 18th
2SohOh VI ehS AAA " NAllCu uUClhIbb,
That all courts shall be open, and every ,
erson for an injury done him in his lands,
GODS, person or reputation, shall have rene ..
y by due course of law, and right and JUS
ice administered without sale, denial or de- /
W." To secure these ends the government /
organized, and its leading features pre- :
,ribed and adjusted by the constitution
his court is established, and the number of |
S terms regulated for this great purpose of q
le administration of justice; and it is the '
ght of every citizen, at every term, to have =
,medy for any injury of which he may COM !
laini and this right cannot be denied or de- {
yed without violation of the solemn
of the constitution.
The legislature may divide the State into
lree districts for the election of the judges,
ut when that right has been exercised, the
over to district the State for any purpose
'nnected with this court is exhausted. The
dyes so chosen compose one court, which at
cry term Ia 0upn fO all naraona invoktno Il