Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1879-08-05
"LUCUS ("
On the Abolition of the County
Courts.
Correspondence of the Register.

OOuI
Correspondence of the Register.
In your article of Saturday you say:
" We did not include the abolition OF The
County Courts IN the three notifications to
b. obtained by the adoption OF the amend
p,e,,ts, because this could Be done under The
present Consolation more easily and directly
than By the amendments" In support OF
this you say, substantially, that a bill
Senate bill 7S) stripping the County
Court OF its judicial functions was
passed by the last State Senate" and
that it only failed to become a law be-
cause ait got to the House during the
last hours of the session." and was the
unfortunate victim OF "misunderstand-
ing, hOcus-pOcus or stupidity on the
part of the members.
With reference to the history of Sem
ate bill No. rs, it appears from House
journal, page 1919, that the sald bill got
10 the House not during the last hours
Of the session" but on January 20. just
forty days with the nights thrown in
before the Legislature adjourned. Con-
corning the hocus-pocus and stupidity,
| am not advised, but | do know that
there was widespread opinion that
the bill was unconstitutional, and al
though efforts were made several times
to pass it, they always failed.
But suppose that bill had been passed
or should be passed, and admitting it to
be constitutional, hereafter, would 1t &C
complish what you claim for it, to-wit,
the abolition of the County Court as a
judicial tribunal? In my opinion it
would not by any means. 1t would de-
prive that court of large part OF its Jur-
isdIction. but would not abolish the
court. This is, | think, an important
distinction, and one which you
have failed to perceive. Senate
bill No. IS, Ia copy OF which |
have before me- leaves with the
County Court original jurisdiction
among other cases, 'of all matters OF
probate, of all matters relating
to apprentices; of certiOrari; OF cases Of
bastardy, OF all criminal offences below
the grade of felony" From this we see
that while the ogre is curtailed in his
allowance OF nOurishment there is still
enough left TO sustain life. The Court
would still have the power to empaLnel
juries and try causes, and would not be
abolished by at least small majority.
But suppose bill could be and should
be passed under Section p, taking away
all jurisdiction involving the trial OF
causes. Would the Court then be abol-
ished? Again | say nay. Section % OF
Article S, says that there shall be IN each
county Of he State a County Court, which
shall hold four sessions IN each gear for the
trial Of causes.
No legislative power can set aside this
provision, and, though it should say
that this court shall have no cases to
try, still the president and two justices
must come smiling to the scratch four
times in each year, besides the other
two times that they are required to
meet for the transaction of fiscal bust !
ness. Whether this state of affairs
would be satisfactory to the people of
the State and add to the respect enter
tanned for our judicial system by our
own citizens, as well as those of other
States, leave to each individual to de-
termine for himself do insist, how
ever, that the County Court cannot he
abolished without constitutional amend
ment.
\ few words with reference to certi-
Tying cases from a justice to the county
court under section 33 OF the Consttu-
ton. Your mode of repeating or avoid
ing this provision without amending
the Constitution is so unique that
scarcely know how to reply. Section
80 provides in unequivocal and uncon-
ditional terms that if the amount claim
ed in a suit before justice shall exceed
so it shall be the duty OF the justice, If
requested by the defendant before trial,
TO transmit the papers in the
case to the county court to be
therein tried. This is in the Consitu-
ton. Now you propose to avoid this
by abOlishing the County Court through
IH act 0fHc Legislature, because iii there
were no County Court to certify to,
there could be no certifying done" Ii
the Legislature can get around the Con.
in that way, 1t strikes me that
4 Constitution is a mere luxury or orna-
ment. See the situation of affairs under
your plan. The abolition of the County
Court by an act of the Legislature would F.
not relieve the Justice Of the duty under f.
section 33, "to transmit the papers in
he case to the County Court"
Ii there was no County Court to re-
,eive them, that would not be his look |
Dut. He can do nothing but "tranS- /
nit, " and ii "the papers in the case
ike the dove sent from the ark, find uo /
resting place, it will be the fault OF some /.
pne other than the Justice. But the |
County Court will continue TO exist so |
Ong as Sec. 23 of Art. remains in force, |
rs have already shown. Therefore | |
claim that this certifying OF cases from a
Justice to the County Court cannot be |
lone away with except by an /
amendment to the Constitution, and /
that as the proposed amendment /
lccomplishes this, there must be an adj |.
lition made to your list OF notifications +.
not possible under the present Consti- /
tuition"
You 90 into a side issue concerning |
appeals from justices. You certainly /.
know that an appeal is very different |
thing from certifying or removing be- |
lore trial. An appeal is taken after trial
and judgment and the statutes OF Nir-
ginia and West Virginia have always re-
luired bond to be given. But | do
ieny that under the present Constitu-
ton the Legislature would have the F.
power to require a bond to be given in |
eases transferred or certified from JUS |
tice under section 33 OF the present ar
ticle The Legislature cannot, in my
impose such condition or
upon right granted by the
Constitution Internationally and with
cut restriction. Yours,
| r-Tr-s