The Russellville Democrat., 1876-08-03
TER4S:
Duties of Justices Of tho
 Peace,

To the editor of the DEMOCRAT:
 Permit me to say through the columns of your paper that the peace and quietude of our ceun- try very greatly depend on the way in which our justices of the peace execute the laws. In the first place it seems to be almost the settled conclusion of justices that neither the law nor their oath, of office requires them to take cognizance of any violation of law unless complaint be made in writing, sworn to, and filed /; or, unless the crime be committed in the immediate presence of such justices, which would be impossible in many instances. They, the justices, Tn the event of a violation of law in their presence, would turn their backs, shut their eyes, or run away to avoid seeing it. Now, the law makes It their duty, i'll all cases of alleged violation, to investi- gate such cases of alleged viola tion. And in all cases, where the same comes to the knowledge of 8 justice, that there is, or is to be, an assemblage of two or more persons to commit an unlawful net, it is the sworn ddty of said sad justice to take steps at the proper time to prevent the com mission of such unlawful act, by causing said parties to be arrest ed and dealt with as the law di- reets. Justices of the peace have jurisdiction in all cases of viola tions of criminal law from mur- Ger in the first degree down to the least crime known to the law. In cases of felony such jurisdic- tion extends only so far as to cause the arrest and commitment to jail offenders, or their binding over to court, as the law may direct. In all cases below felony, if l am not mistaken, they have the right, and 1t is their duty, to fine or imprison as the law di rects. It is true our circuit court has jurisdiction co-extensive with justices of the peace over the perpetrators of crime below that of felony. And why is this so? I hold, sir, that 1t is because our law makers have seen, long since, that justices almost totally fal tcycharge thZr duty in eases nSer Ehlch~snoy have iuris- aI1fEns a{d such jurisdiction
 ", t& tAsm, to be exclusive.
 K&Se, therefore, placed the
 N~Jury Dehind justices, as it
 S take-up all cases which
 6fF failed to attend to, The Grand Jury has no right to take up any case that has been law fully disposed of by justice of the peace. Well do l remember, sir, the charge given to our last Grand Jury by our Honorable Judge, Mansfield, at the last ses- sion of our Circuit Court, in rela- tion tc cases over which justices had jurisdiction. To tho very great shame and dishonor of justices, the Judge said "ln at least some cases the jurisdiction pf a justice of the peace had been &sed to screen the perpetrator oi crime from the due punishment pf law, the extent of such punish ment to be governed by the Cir gut Court. This had been done by kind of sham or false trial, pr imposing light fines for grave offences. Justices have not the right in any case to impose Q smaller fine than Is demanded by the law. You know, sir that our Grand Juries spend the greater part of their time Ill the investi- ,atioA of crimes that should have been settled by our justices Of the peace.
 Now Mir EditeE, for fear oi mearying you, or asking too muof Fpace, l will make one ar twc suggestions, and close th.s arti
 ple Car you figure up the sav