The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-07-30

resident judge, with unlimited jurisdiction,
in each parish. In reply to the argument
that the abolition Of the parish courts
whilst obtaining economy, sacrifices eff
cheney, and leaves the people without the
necessary judicial machinery Legislator
says:
II the word "parish" represented any def
mite aggregate Of PoPud5a9tion or any ascer
argument would be seemingly correct, for all
portions of the State should be alike supplied
with adequate administration of justice, but
such Is not the case. Parishes differ in pOpu-
Iation and in wants, and to say that each
parish should have one judge is to do in
justice by giving one parish more than 1t
requires, whilst the other parishes have only
an adequate supply. Thus, the parish Of St
Landry has population OF 10000 the parish
OF Cameron, one OF 2OOO, etc.
The argument is that it is only necessary to
district the State under the amendments with
reference to the population Of the different
parishes, and the efficiency of the courts will
be secured accordingly. Says Legislator :"
This inequality of population renders it
perfectly clear that an inequality of need for
|. courts Of justice exists, and, therefore, that
the fixing of the unequal measure Of parish
lines would afford an unequal and costly jul
dicial system.
i Upon the same principle the parishes Of
the State should be formed, solely with refer
ence to the population Of certain sections Of
country. According to this argument II
Cameron, with it's 1900 people, is to have a
! police jury, sheriff, clerk, and all the other
offices and appurtenances of a parochial
government, st. Landry, with its 10000
population, should have twenty paro-
chiaI establishments. If the convenience
and efficiency Of the judiciary system is de-
pendent upon the equal distribution of courts
according to population, why are not the
parish lines established on the same princi-
, pe2 If the principle is applied in one in
stance and not in the other inextricable con-
fusion is the necessary result The Judge of
district, residing in one parish, cannot issue,
in the parish of his residence orders to take
effect In another parish. He must go to the
parish in which the matter is pending to give
them effect
i A man arrested for a crime in Cameron can
not be heard on his application for bail or ha-
beas corpus in st. Landry. The judge must
go to Cameron, and in the meantime the man
must lie in Jail while his constitutional guar
antees are held in allegiance It matters not il
Cameron has but 200 inhabitants; each one OF
these Is entitled to the same prompt, speedy
and certain justice that is assured to the peo-
pie of the most populOus parish in the
State. The distribution of the courts Of the
State should not be made with reference
to the population or the amount Of litigation
to be disposed of. So far as the labor
is concerned, the eighteen district courts now
| in existence can dispose of all the litigation
90
respects to have but eighteen parishes there
would be no use for any more courts. But so
long as there are tifty-eight parishes In the
State, each with its own court, whose iuris-
diction is limited by the parish lines, it Is alb
solutely necessary to the prompt and efficient
dispensation Of justice that each of these
ffty-eight courts should have Judge of its
own. Each of these parishes constitutes q
separate and distinct jurisdiction, which
should not be exercised by the resident OF
another parish, invested with another juris-
diction. 1t has always been conceded that
there should be a court in each parish
To be efficient these courts should each
have judge to keep in continuous
and active operation all of it's functions. A
court without judge for the greater part of
the year Is very impotent affair. II we
are not TO have judge for every parish, AID
districts are to be established it would be
better to have but one court for each district,
whose processes shall extend to the whole
district without reference to parish lines. The
State has evidently been divided into parishes
for considerations Of convenience with which
! population had but little to do. The same
considerations apply with equal force to the
distribution Of the courts. The amount of
work a judge has to do is Of no consequence,
but where these judges may be when they
are wanted, and the facility and certainty of
procuring their offices when needed, are mat
| tiers Of the utmost importance.
Legislator" says, incidentally, that the
amendment abolishing parish courts, sub
mitted in 1876, was defeated, not because it
abolished the parish courts-meaning the resi-
dent judciary-but because the people did not
believe the eighteen district courts then pro-
vided for could do the work of the State. We
entirely dissent from this proposition. The
amendment was voted down because it left q
number of parishes without Judge resident
within the parish. The same objection applies
to the amendment of1878. With what "Legfs-
latOr" says of the justices of the peace we in
the main agree. He has not touched how
ever, the greatest abuses of these miserable
tribunals as at present organized, which are
right here in New Orleans. These evils
ought to be corrected, but this should be done
by the constitution. The receipt of fees by
justices should be absolutely forbidden. The
common custom in this city is to swear in the
collectors of certain tradesmen as special
constabIes in consideration of the business of
their employers, and the justice is raro aUis
whose judgments are not influenced more by
the chances of securing his costs than by
what his muddled head may conceive to be
the law. We think, also, with ''Legislator,'
that the qualifications of justices should be
fixed, but this should be done by the constitu-
ton, so that they cannot be altered which
would be the case should ignorance and cor
ruption ever again attain ascendency as in the
past.