Herald and tribune. [volume] (Jonesborough, Tenn.) 1869-current, 1876-01-20
Communicated
judge Houk on Practical Re-
form.


State of Tennessee in particular. How
ever it is not my purpose to speak o
other than the State government at pres
ent. Without stopping to locate tn,
blame, | would call the public mind t,
our humiliation and disgrace by reason o
the actual reputation of our obligation.
as State. 1t is sufficient to know that
our State debt is not only unpaid, but
actually OK the increase, our expenditure.
being Ia excess of our income; and that
expedients have been resorted to in order
to meet the ordinary demands on the
Treasury, without any provision or even
policy for the future. Something is ab,
SoIutely essential to prevent irrctrioyable
bankruptcy. One of four things must hap
pen. The revenue Of thu State must be
increased either by tbe increase of our
rates OF taxation, or cur sources of income
must be increased by multiplying articles
OF taxation, 10th by adding new items in
the list of taxable properly, and the de-
Velopment of our resources; or, the OK.
penses of the State government must be
lesSened or the State Iaust become hone,
lessly bankrupt.
This is no enyiable picture. Noyerthe-
less 1t is unquestiouablc true. And to
my mind there is but one of the alterno,
tlves that is at all feasible in these "Sard
times" and that is to cut down and lessen
the cost of the State government. Nv
profession has caused mo to think much
upon the question, and to investigate TO
some extent the costs incident to the nd.
nlihlS'ratlon OF Justice by the courts. |
speak not now of criminal prosecutions,
The laws delays, No., but of the costs in.
Volvsd in the machinery and structure of
our judicial tribunals. .,SLct this question
be briefly analyzed ,and what is the result ?
We ind what | will call "a mixed iu.
aicial SYSTEM" consisting as it does of
CharceFy, Circuit. Common Law, and
Criminal Courts, to say nothing in this
connection of our County Court, with its
enlarged and extensive jurisdiction. Then
l ask If the mere enumeration does not
snow too many courts? Is not the iu-
"'cIai power Of the State too much seats
'ored' Does it not require too many
judges and other officers? Should not
;he judicial powers of the State govern.
ment be concentrated into fewer hands
And wOnld not such policy tend to cur.
tail expenditures of the public money?
Are not these all questions worthy of
grave consideration?
While the principles of equity juris-
prudence constitute one Of the main nil
lars of our civil polity. and like the fla.
ming sword guarding the approach to the
tree OF life turn every way to protect
the citizen in his rights ;and while l have
no Tar to make on our jurisprudence as
practlsed in our Cbancery Courts, still |
am of the opinion that the gorm of tho
system can be preserved in another form
and with much less expense to the people.
Just why there should be Criminal, Cons
mon Law, Circuit and Chancery Courts
as distinctive organizations, is a wonder
to many. And it is exceedingly hard to
make the unproiessional people under.
stand why and how it is that suitors are
constantly told from the Bench that tbey
have a good cause of action, and are en-
titled to, and ought to have redress for
a
admitted wrongs, but that they have ems
tered the Temple of Justice by way of the
wrong door-that is, that they have COM
menced their action in the Circuit or Com.
mon Law Court, and their remedy is ne.
culiarly of equitable cognizance, and
therefore of Chancery jurisdiction, or
ctcc cersd. There are but few States
that maintain these courts in their sop>
arate character. In New York, and l
believe all the States, with three excep.
tions, the Chancery Court, ,as distinctive
tribunal, no longer exists. Modelling
after the United States system, the prin>
ciples of equity are preserved, and all
actions lie in the same court-that is, be,
fore the same Judge, who, under the rc>
vised policy, has both Law and equity jus
risdiction, and in whose court both law
and equity are administered without
sale or denial" Would it not be well to
transform our system so that when liti>
gants happen to mistake their remedy by
instituting suit at law, when it should
have been in equity, or vice uersa, the
Court may have power to permit amend
ments' and by its own order place the
cause on the proper side Of the docket
without turning them out of the supposed
Temnla Of Lnstice ne is oh0r A..