The Colfax chronicle. [volume] (Colfax, Grant Parish, La.) 1877-1981, 1878-07-13
The Judiciary Amendments.
IN. o. Democrat ]

conspicuous or more deplOrable
than in the cumbrous, expensive
and utterly inefficient Judiciary
system established by it. A more
costly and, at the same time, a
more inefficient administration of
civil and criminal justice than it
affords could not be imagined, and
for this reason any amendment of
it would be an Improvement In
the first place it costs hundreds OF
thousands of dollars annually more
than would be necessary to sup
port much more efficient system.
But this is by no means the great
est objection to the system as it is
now constituted. 1t is in its ina
bility to meet the regiments of the
commercial community, in its long,
tedious and costly processes, and
in the uncertainty and delay which
attend the enforcement of obliga-
tons that the crying evil lies.
These facts were in a measure re-
allied by the last Legislature, as
was evidenced by their endeavor
to reconstruct the whole judiciary
in the amendments to the constitu-
ton submitted to- the people for
ratification. In order to judge of
the expendiency of the proposed
amendments, we must first consider
the faults of the existing system,
First, let us look at its cost.
There are in the State, outside of
New Orleans, ffty-seven parish
judges, drawing each a salary of
$500. Besides these there are
some eighteen or twenty district
judges, drawing each salary of
$4,000. There is no reason in the
world why one Of these sets of
courts should not be entirely abol-
ished, thus operating an immense
saving to the State. This the
amendments propose TO do, and in
this respect we have no objections
to urge to them. We freely con-
cede them the merit of economy.
But if this economy is purchased
at the expense of even the meagre
and inadequate facilities that now
exist for the administration of JUS
tice, it is obtained at q price that
the people cannot afford to pay.
This however, is precisely the case
that will be presented in the event
of the ratification of the proposed
amendments. What economy is
obtained will be ut the expense of
promptness and certainty in the
final adjudication of causes. It
would be better to pay rs heavily
as we do now and increase the ia
7cilities for enforcing the rights of
litigants. Under the existing sys-
tenn the impediments in the way
of speedy justice are due to two
causes. /. The lack of a complete
resident Judiciary, and the infre-
quency of the sessions of district
courts. 2. The crowded docket of
the Supreme Court, resulting from
its extensive appellate jurisdiction.
The first Of these troubles is ex-
perienced for the most part in
country parishes, and the latter in
New Orleans. ..
In the country parishes the
trouble lies in the limited jurisdic-
ton of the parish courts and in the
peripatetic character of the district
courts. The parish courts consti-
tute the sole recommendation of
the present system, and their ad-
vantage lies in the simple fact that
they afford resident Judge to
each and every parish. 1t was for
this reason that the people refused
to abolish them by ratifying the
amendment submitted at the last
election, in spite of the many de-
ficiencies and extravaeant cost of
the system.
The refusal of the people to
ratify the amendment abolishing
these courts meant nothing else
than that they desired resident
judge at every county seat, no mat
ter at what cost. We do not be-
lieve that this feature of the exist.
ing system will Se readily relin-
pushed by the people, nor do we
think that it should be. Only
those who are familiar with the
disadvantages resulting from the
non-residence of the district Judge
under the present system can ap-
preciate the merits of the parish
courts.
The judges of these courts are
always accessible for the granting
Of tho thoucondo ;pforlocrto,r ~.