South Branch intelligencer. [volume] (Romney, Va. [W. Va.]) 1830-1896, 1880-09-17
Tha oonstIeutlonal Amandmonts
: Thonghtfil, Able and Comprehensive Review
Of Inc Operation o. she Proposed Amendments

t.ne toliosirg Is 6 summary OF the points ia
tee speech delivered by Jjha ". Mason, 81
Grafton, on Az proposed Arreodaea,s to ;ic
coasti luton
lie explained that two amendments
wore subioittcd; one IS a Substitute for
Article eight Of the Constitution and the
other auendiug Section thirteen Of Ar
ucle three, so as Co a,ow juries before
justices. and then gave among others the
following objections to their ratification
Flrst-They provide for no intcrine-
diite court between justices courts and
Circuit Courts for the trial of causes.
without an intermediate court the time
of the Circuit Courts will be occupied by
the trial of trivial causes, appeals and
petty otfenses, and much important bust
ness will be necessarily postponed.
Second--There being no intermediate
courts the amendments do not provide
sufficient number of judicial circuits. 1t
Is with great difficulty that the Judges
OF the Circuits can keep up with their
work. These amendments add to their
work the business of the Circuit Courts,
and only increase their numbers to four
lie was somewhat familiar with the la
bors OF the Judges of the County Courts.
and had no hesitation IL saying that
there are not nine men in the State who
do one half as much work as the nine
Judges of our Circuit Court. Add TO
their duties this additional work and no
thirteen men In this State can do the
work. Business will accumulate on the
dockets and much expensive and trouble.
some delay will be the result.
Ihird-They increase the jurisdiction
OF Justices to 5000. This is Il great in
novation on our laws, and will be found
wholly unsuited to our people. With
such jurisdiction more than half Of the
actions at law would be cognizable be-
fore justice. To place so many cases
OF such importance III the hands OF
single Justice, to be tried IN some re-
mote corner of the county, away from
books and records, is simply to inaugu,
rate ridiculous and expensive judicial
force. Records would be imperfeclly
made and preaervsj, and il would be al
most Impossible to ascertain what had
been done Slch a. jurisdiction would
be perllous 10 the debtor class.
Many men who are really solvent, owe
money AMI are not ALWAYS ready to mect
SO large sum as 1900 The present
system does not permit unreasonable de
lay, but II does protect tho oppression OF
the hcarilrss creditor. ~ Il little G-iny
the creditor gets his :nnnoY, aai the
debtor Is saved from utter rain Bnc II
you ratify these amendments suit NAV be
brought for $500 in the morning, and
Judgment and execution entered in the
evening. and the property sold the next
week. In fact this system may DO called
Ia creditors bill. II is not sound states.
manship to place enc class of citizens so
completely in the hands Of the other.
Fourth These amendments are OBJ
jectionab.e. because. they provide for in
ries before justices. / object to this
feature because it will be expensive, and
will lead to interminable confusion and
sill render Justices courts in substance
what the County Court now is. The
functions of q Judge could not be per-
formed by justice wholly unskillcd In
judicial proceedings. The prerogati,e,
powers and duties of the court and Jury
would be SO confused as to tie farcial in
tho extreme. The expense of such sys-
tenn would be ruinous 10 the taxpayer.
1t Is mistake to say that the Legislature
can pass law requiring litigants 20 pay
for the jury III advance. Under this a.
mendmcnt the right of trial by Jury
whore the amount in controversy in az :
ton at law exceeds 800 is preserved to
every ons who demands jury. Aud
the Legislature can no more pass an act
requiring the party demanding o iury
before justice TO pay the expense, than
It can in the Circuit Courts. Both arc
precisely upon the same footing. To
give jury to the party who can pay for
it, and refuse it to one who cannot, is to
preserve the right OF trial by jury to the
rich man, and deny it to the poor.
But it is suggested that we vote down
the amendment providing for iuries be-
fore justices and adopt the other. This
will put us in a worse condition. We
will thus have constitution requiring a
jury, where the amount in controversy
exceeds 800 and have no court with q
jurisdiction of less than $50 where iu-
ry can be impaneled. and therefore no
case involving sums between $40 and
$50, could be tried at all, If jury were
demanded.
Fifth-Justices Courts will have to he
made courts Of record, in order to Sc
cure appeals.
Tho amendment TO article three pro
vides that "no fact tried by jury shall
be otherwise re examined in any case
than according to the rules Of common
law. Common Law appeals could not
DC tried de moro but were tried upon
points reserved in errors appearing from
the record. Therefore, Justices Courts
would have to bo created Courts of Re-
cord" When party TO suit where
there was jury desired 70 correct any
error, he would have to have the record
prepared and preserved during the trial
by a lawyer or some ono skilled IN jadi.
cisl proceedings, which vii establish a
court with jurIes and lawyers at every
cross roads in the country.
Sixth-Article g "a Objectionable be-