The Ouachita telegraph. [volume] (Monroe, La.) 1865-1889, 1881-10-07
COUI.T OE AppEALS.

It ceartainly is evident to all who
have given any attention to the SUBJ
jcct, that the Constitutional Convcn-
ton made mistake in tho matter of
jurisdiction of this Court. Asest pres
ent constituted the office Of Judge of
the Court of Appeals, leaving out the
fatigue of travelling. etc, is almost a
sinecure. With such limited jurisdic-
ton, having coGnizance OF only thosc
cases where the amount Involved
ranges between $500 ana 81 200, its Ia
bors cannot at any time bear an eco
nomical Or reasonable portion to the
a1nount 0isbur5cd for salaries. An en-
tire change should be made in the jul
dicial system, or else tho jurisdiction Of
the Court OF Appeals be extended so as
to embrace all cases up to $4,000. a
prominent lawyer spoke to us OF a
plan which would perhaps be better
still. His idea is to give tho Court Of
Appeals unlimited jurisdiction above
tho final Jurisdiction of District
Courts, and let appeals lie for them to
the Supreme Court on questions of law
only; and instead Of District Judges,
let there be Il judge for each parish
at 4 reduced salary. This would Ger
tainly have the effect of relieving the
Supreme Court, and at the same time
give US more uniformity in the uecis-
ions Of our courts than we now enjoy.
Under the present judiciary system
! the Courts OF Appeals i'll different
| circuits; may render contradictory dc
cisions on the same point, and yet
! there is no remedy; but il parties had
| the right on questions of law to carry
such decisions to the Supreme Court,
as suggested, the evil would DC Obviat-
ell and uniformity attained i'll the jill
risprudcncc Of the Slate. There would
also be no doubt about a Isia pro quo,
as between the salaries, and services of
| the Judges of the Courts Of Appeals, rs
| they would have their full measure Of
labor. What say our members Of the
Legislature in view Of either n new
constitution or amendments to the
cumbersome instrument adopted in
1879? we suggest these ideas. Let us
hear from some one else. - Mt"KiSuNc
HcUictc.
We arc glad to soc tho editor of the
Review coming around to our way of
thinking. Sometime ago brother Gre
million seemed to bc very mucil biased
i'll favor of tho Circuit Courts; but the
above from ii1s pen shows that he is
now pretty much Of the same way OF
thinking Is tho majority of tho people
of the State. In Our Opiuion what tho
people want FOR their judiciary system,
is, ono Judge of unlimited jurisdiction
for each parish, one States attorney
for each parish, IN Appellate Court for
each Congressional District Cor some
such territorial division}, this Appel
| late Court to pass on questions OF both
| law and fact; and then Il Supreme
Coort to pass on questions of law done
appealed from the intermediate OF
| Appellate Court. This is practically
the system which prevails in France
! where it i; found to work very salts
factorily.
| This plan WAS submitted 10 the Con.
Stitutiunll Convention hut they pre-
| frrrch on the advice OF their Judiciary
committee togivc Us the pre- sent Iaybre.l
and unsatisfactory system. We believe
that The Legislature at lis FIRST meeting
will very willingly give us q constittl.
| tional amendment c:nbniying Il judi
GARY System, such AS is auggcstcH above,
ior they cannot have failed to notice
| the great necessity for y change, --I'ninl
! touyi":3 Eog2,,n,'.