New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-10-31


other can affect it, for the provision giving
the clerks power to issue certain writs and
settle successions when no opposition ls
made is q relief to the business OF the
court, the treasury of the parish and the
pockets of the heirs. 1t may have an unex-
pected effect in reducing the fees Of the,
lawyers, for competent and honest clerk
could transact the business to the sstisfac-
ton of all without their intervention. There
is another advantage in giving district
clerks this power. 1t is in accordance with
the practice at common law and with that
of other States. Many CT the latter have
paid no attention to the subject in their
constitutions, providing that the duties of
clerks shall be established by law, but
Arkansas (vii.. g., Massachusetts tc. vi, 81,
Missouri (vi, 2o), and Tennessee wi, l2),
especially provide that writs shall be signed
and issued by clerks bearing teste of the
senior justice or by the clerk.
One objection of Mr.. Herman goes not
to the merits of the present proposed
change, but to the feasibility of change
in the future. Doubtless it is more cum
brous and dllatory to make reform move
ment when the status is protected by the
constitution instead of merely by law. The
trainers of the constitutions of Illinois and
Pennsylvania, which descend more than
any others into details usually considered
matters of legislature work, have recog-
nized this and ignored the duties of clerks.
But there are very few States whose
statutes do not prescribe the issuing of
writs as portion of their official routine.
In Louisiana the case ia different. Past ex-
perience has shown that no Legislature
elected in this State can be curbed too
much, and in this respect the amendment
is to be commended a. Q step in the right
direction.
In less than half of the States there are
county courts similar to the parish courts
proposed to be abolished. They seem gem
orally to be regarded az of little use except
where custom and precedent have made
them familiar. Nearly all constitutions,
after providing for supreme, circuit, pro.
and higher jurisdiction, have referred the
rest to the Legislature with power to ''es-
tablish such inferior courts" as may be
deemed necessary. Those of Illinois wi, u,
New York 1S46. vi, Isl, Oregon (vii., ~,
and South Carolina lviii., u expressly e.
tablish them. This amendment goes fur
ther and prohibits them.
In conclusion it can be said that the ad-
vantsges of the amendment are sufficient
to outweigh the objections. By q more
careful selection of Justices, and in many
cases their appointment falls into the hands
| of the Governor, in whom all Judicial &C.
lection, except for attorneJr, should lay,
the evils of criminal jurisdiction complained
of would be extinguished. Even Mr.. Ker.
nan admits that the parish judges are but
little better than the justices. In civil
matters there is little more work fol
| judges and clerks. The latter as class
are more competent than the parish judges
and it is rare that q complaint of them i:
heard. The saving to State and parish viii
| be far more than the amount claimed, and
the country will be spared more Legislative
| judicial creations. The example of Orleans
should be sufficient on that point. Accused
parties will no longer be imprisoned
months without hearing or bail, and th'
| civil system will be found more simple an(
better adapted to cause its administrator
| to be "learned in the law" than the presen
one. 1t is to be hoped that the amendmen
will be adopted. The Legislature will the'
have an opportunity to propose others tha
| will make all men equal before the law
to prevent . plaintiff having the righ
to select his judge, the defendan
having NO such right; to assimilat'
the judicial hierarchy Of Orleans II
that Of other parishes; remove from
the Legislature the obnoxious power o
creating additional courts, and replace
| with the necessary one of establishing tn
| requisite number of Judges; regulate tn
right of appeal by writ of error or other
wise that the legality of possession ma.
not be determined by the amount in dis
pute, and restrict it that the same reasol
may not be legal cause of inequitable de
lay. These and other measures are needed
but the first step is the adoption Of thos
now before the people.