Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1873-03-27
Municipal Court.


which of late years has settled down up
on that tribunal, and so blocked its pro-
gress and loaded its calender to such an
extent as to render it impossible for the
people to obtain right and:justice freely
and without being obliged to purchase
it; completely and without any denial;
promptly and without delay, conforma-
bly, to the laws.
The Bill of Rights in our State Con-
stitution declares that every person
within this State ought to find certain
remedy, by having recourse to the laws,
for all injuries or wrongs which he may
receive in his person, property or char
acter, yet this certain remedy comes to
be a very questionable blessing when by
reason Of the pressure of business up
on the court it takes from one to four
years to collect a promisory note OF
twenty-five dollars, and costs forty dol
lars in attorney fees. 1t has all the eff
feet upon the pocket of the party that
he would suffer from a purchase OF JUS
tice, unless in the purchase he had to
pay higher price. The justice strikes
him as incomplete when he has paid
nearly double his note in costs to obtain
it. and he never understands the slow
progress of his suit, to be promptness
without delay.
But in this article we purpose to call
attention to some Of the benefits our
community would derive from another
court of record, with jurisdiction am
| pie enough to finally dispose of all ques-
tions of fact in a cause. Under our
laws a Justice of the peace has a general
Jurisdiction in ordinary civil actions,
where the matter in demand does not
exceed two hundred dollars. Every
practicing attorney has his Justice who
does that business for him, holds court
in his office. renders judgments i'll actions
whether defaulted or tried, signs min
ute of the judgment on the back OF the
writ. and delivers it to the attorney to
keep, and no other record is made, so
that in all that immense amount OF liti-
cation, where the matter in demand does
not exceed two hundred dollars, a party
desiring an inspection of the record
might apply to the court in vain, there
is no resort for him to find out what has
been done in an important court, except
he goes to his enemies camp and asks
the attorney of his opponent to have
the kindness to show him the record,
and when he sees the writ there is per-
haps an entry endorsed on it that there
was Judgment for plaintiff for one hun
dred and ninety dollars damages anc
twenty-five dollars costs, without a sin
Gle specification, without The name OF
Juror who tried the cause, without
pleading of any kind TO show what tn
subject matter of the litigation was, o
for what he was beaten, and if sue
again for the same subject matter, h
must grope in darkness until he come
upon witness that can testify to VIVA
was tried in the former suit.
The practice is for the justice to sig
whatever the attorney for plaintiff Ell
dorses upon the writ as the judgment
the court, and about the only protectio
, the parties have, is the honesty OF tn
e LAWYER. Now the proposition that a
LAWYERS are honest, is generally correct
Some of the men Of the best integrlt
n in the community practice law, but |
:, This rule there are some notable eXceI
I tions. and il becomes the people not I
/ relv upon the integrity of any one elias
e of men TO the exclusion Of all othe
Il safeguards. Lawyers are human, an
e we may be DESTROYS of more endurin
e and better protected records of such in
L portant matters, when we reflect thu
IS two LAWYERS in this county have absconC
II ed for cause within less than six month
and also that any petifogger may pra'
i tice before Justice and keep his record
J. whether he has the endorsement OF b
r inc a member Of the bar or not.
We know a case in point as an illu
10 tration. About the year 1862 notorio
is pettifogger, who then figured in this
he cinity, when we will designate as !
sued man, who we will call B., for
witness fee in a suit in the County Coul
=, amounting to four or five dollars. L
Il suit was brought before Justice
or known integrity and ability. B. claim
,al he had paid the witness fee to A., a
no there was a trial before the Justice. L
,ot Justice heard the evidence and learn
arguments of counsel on both sides, a
go rendered his decision for the defenda
~ SIGNED the minute on the back of
- writ and delivered it to a lawyer VIII
no A. had employed to help try the 81
~, Four or five years afterward the office
~ this LAWYER was destroyed by fire, g
this Judgment file was burned. Sc
after the lawyer applied to the Justice
sion a minute of some judgments he
wn saved where the files were burned.
Lot- Justice, acting on the presumption 7
ney all LAWYERS are honest, signed his ma
a few times on the book. Less thai
avs wear afterwards B. was again sued Oh
'lue Judgment rendered for that witness
xes, in which he had beaten A. in 1862. ]
inc, suit was before another Justice,
le trial was had, the minute on the b
d at signed by the first Justice was prodr
hing and the loss of the original file pro-
The defendant then called the
> in Justice and his own attorney, and pro
With that the original judgment was for
par PENDANT, and the plaintiff was a
nee thrown in the action. Time passed
nor. and in 1872 another suit was brought
is q fore still another justice, precisely
the the one in 1868, and another jury
the was had, and another judgment rend
, ice for B. but by this time, by the st
and accretion of interest and claim
eater costs, brought the claim of the plai
,,non to more than ten dollars, and A. app
to the County Court, and that suit
..;ao of the five or six hundred that now
80 . the calendar of the higher court