Arizona weekly citizen., 1882-10-29
IrnaE u. R- IIHHIHTZrR

That an immediate change in our ju-
 diclal system IS a matter of absolute
 necessity will not, l think, be denied;
 but as to what that change shall be will | doubtless give rise to many differences | of opinion.
 That a re-dlvison of the Territory into
 a larger number of districts, thereby
 avoiding the necessity of additional l Courts, would be the most satisfactory,
 and at the same time, the least expen-
 slye plan, IS quite apparent.
 It seems, however, to be the generally
 received opinion. that to increase the
 number If judicial districts would re-
 quire an act of Congress sau,horizing the
 same and providing additional Supreme
 Judges to preside over them.
 After careful examination of the
 organic act creating this Territory fan
 tO find that Congress reserves to itself
 any control whatever over Territo-
 rial Courts, aside from the Supreme
 Court. The language of the act Is That
 the judicial power shall be vested in a
 Supreme Court to consist of three
 judges and such inferior Courts as the
 Legislative council may by law pre-
 scribe The subsequent clause in the
 act referring to the organic act
 of New Mexico to determine the
 powers, duties, etc, of such Supreme Court and its judges, does not, in my opinion, either alter or modify the clause quoted. If any legislation upon the part of Congress Is at all necessary 1t IS an act authorizing the establish ment of courts with Federal jurisdiction within the Territory. While the New Mexico act may sufficiently authorize our district courts as now organized, as courts of federal jurisdiction, 1t certainly does not extend beyond that.
 It would therefore follow, if my posi- uOn be correct, that our present Distinct courts exercise Territorial jurisdiction solely under territorial authority; our Legislature having created the present three judicial districts and designated the three Supreme Judges as presiding judges thereof, can, of course, by its act, abolish the present organization of said District Courts; increase the number of dis | tTlcts Tn accordance with the present | needs of tie Territory, and provide for | the election of judges and clerks in the | respective districts. Such new districts | should be so apportioned, with refer ence to the amount of business of each | county, that each county may have at | least four regular terms per aunum.
 The additional burden thus placed | upon the Territory Of providing sala- | ries of sufficient amounts to secure com petent parties as judges of these Courts, while 1t would not exceed, if indeed 1t | equalled that which would necessarily | al i,v~e h. [ or Courts III each county, could be in | some measure frightened by imposing a small tax as a judge fee upon each suit filed in such Courts. Any attempt Co create Courts os subordinate jurisdic- tion to our present District Courts and | at the same time to merge in them the jurisdiction of our Probate Courts, would be matter of complex legisla- tion entirely beyond the capacity of our run of SOlons, and leading to more or less complications and confu- sion; and though successfully accom- plished would not give that general sat that an extension of the Dis tuct Court system would afford County Courts, while they afforded to limited class of hhgants a more speedy hearing. would still increase their expenses and delays by providing one more Court to go through, snd would not materially tighten tLe labors of the District Court. The District Court with four terms per lnnum will answer every purpose of speedy justice both to htigants and criminals, while the expense of litiga- ton will not be materially increased thereby. It may be objected that to a Grand Jury four times each year would be too great a burden on he counties. Such objection would be velghty were it not possible and even desirable to dispense altogether with hat effete relic of ancient barbarism. Quite & number of the States have abol- shed the Grand Jury with satisfactory esults, substituting therefor the examination before magis- rate and presentment by the District | Attorney. Why should not Arizona low take this important step in the march of civilization, and at once abol- sh a burden so altogether useless and | t the same time so outrageously ex ,euSiye2 H. B IIGUrUIzFR