, 1879-02-23
JUSTICE COURTS.
1Iason,s Bill to Make Their Judgments an
in4o ia..


Mr., Mason introduced iu the Legislature at
Springfield last week bill providing for an
amendment to Sec. ST Of the Act to provide
for the election and qualification OF justices Of
the Peace and Coastables, and to provide FOR
the jurisdiction and practice OF Justices Of the
Peace in civil cases, and fix The duties of Con-
Stables" etc. The said amendment SO changed
the section as to make it read:
The real property Of any defendant ia judg-
meus before Justice OF the Pence MT exempt
from execution, shall be bound for the payment OF
such Judgment from the date OF tue fling OF a
transcript IN the clerks Office, as provided IN this
net and no such judgment shall be lien upon any
personal property OF such defendant until an actual
levy has been made thereon under execution issued
hy such Justice OF the Peace.
The section to which amendment is proposed
reads as follows:
The personal property Of every defendant in
Judgment before Justice of the Pence. not
exempt from execution, shall be bound for the
payment OF such judgment from the delivery Of the
tho real property Of such defendant not exempt
from execution shall be bound as aforesaid from
1nent in the Clerks Office, provided in this act
feThis Inst section. which is the Law as its stands
upon the statute, makes an execution,
issued by a Justice Of the Peace, . lien
upon al personality 4 Of a';1ora the defendant en- ant
execution to the Constable; and in
addition thereto when transcript Of such judg-
,ncnt is ii1cd with the Circuit Clerk, the judg-
ment becomes lien upon all real property not
exempt from execution. :
TIE PROPOSED AMENDMENT
repcals that portion OF the section making an ex-
ccution i lien upon personal property after
transcript has been filed with the Circuit Clerk.
In a!l other cases where the transcript has not
been filed tile law remains unchanged. It effect
w'itl be limited. as there gre comparatively lew
;1aI xrif 10 ftirf,1i+ Cfnr{-
A reporter yesterday sought from several
Justices an opinion as to the effect Of the
change, were it made. Would it be benedciala
The justices, with one accord, did not care to
express any opinion, because they had not
given the matter any attention and thought.
One OF them said that there were reasons why
the present law was good one, and there were
equally good reasons why the proposed change
would give satisfaction. For instance: A buys
horse from B IN good faith, and, after becom-
ing possessor Of ule animal, learns that there is
in the hands OF q Constable an execution against
BIS personal property. in which the horse
is included. The Constable takes the horse
away from 4, aud leaves him to make refund.
In case B has nothing, what is A to dos Had
the execution not been q lien upon that horse
until ii had actually been served, A would not
be put to any trouble. Aud yet, we're it not
lien until served, the person In whose favor the
execution was issued might BE- deirauded, for
in that case B might have sold the horse after
the execution issued and before the Constable
had had time to hunt the animal up. There we're
serious objections to allowing Constabies to
carry other persons personal property around
in their pockets. Again, we're it decided that
an execution is not a lien until actually served,
leyies would be prccipitatcd. Were IN execu-
tion issued against c and did the Constable not
make levy Immediately c might get his prop
.sget left with nothing. Still, we're Con-
st4ble Obliged to make a levy Immediately after
receiving an execution much harm might be