The Morristown gazette. [volume] (Morristown, Tenn.) 1867-1920, 1883-10-17
OUR JUDIoIAL System (NO. q

II
To the Editor of The Morristown Gazette:
In a recent number of The GAZETTE
the writer sketched the history of aver
age civil litigation in Tennessee, and
showed that according to Che ordinary |
course of events in our courts under
our present system from five to ten or
twelve years are necessary to begin and
end litigated case. Startling as this
proposition may seem to persons not e-
duainted with Tennessee litigation, 1t
is literally true, and the picture not
overdrawn. 1t is the necessary result
of the (now) antiquated, and (else-
where) obsolete system to which we, as
State, adhere.
propose now to look from practl-
cal standpoint at the means used to
bring criminals to punishment in Ten
nessee.
A man gets into a difficulty with his
neighbor, which results in fist fight.
The peace and dignity of a great State
is trampled upon. II it happen within
the limits of an incorporated town, the
marshall in twenty minutes makes an
arrest. The Mayor or recorder hears
the proof, fines or imprisons the guilty
party, and it is over with in an hour.
But how is it according to the State
code and the practice in the State courtsf
The man is arrested and brought before
a justice of the peace. He pleads mot
! guilty." The justice hears the proof
is convinced that he made an assault.
He ought to fine him or imprison him.
The law says no. He can simply bind
him to appear before the circuit court
to answer the charge. This convenes
three times year. If the man has
friend worth a $3.50 bond above exemp-
tions, who will go his security for his
appearance at court, he gives bond,
otherwise he goes to Jail.
Court comes. The witnesses are
gravely taken before an august tribunal
composed OF thirteea citizens, who are
called frem their homes and business,
J from different parts of the county.
! These thirteen men hear one side only
} of the case, and if from this hearing
they or twelve Of them are of opinion
the man is guilty, judging from this
confessedly partial and one-sided view,
, they-simply upon their oaths-say so
/ in a bill of indictment. Now, the
5 sheriff goes and arrests the man, (al
5 though he may be in Jail and is certain
( ly on bond), for which pro .f0ranG service
= he gets dollar. The cause is now in
] court, at the heels of a docket that il
e on an average one or two years behind
4 so that the man in that time, if he il
: anxious for it, may be able to force 1
= trial. Meantime two, three or half {
f dozen men haYe. been tending court
six days in the week for from three Il
six weeks each, at a dollar day each
> one-half of them to prove that the maj
n struck Billy Patterson first, the ethe
IS half TO prove that Billy Patterson strucl
Y the man first. H aFt"
Finally a trial is reached; twelve mel
g who are losing the week from thei
home affairs on account of such stuff a
this; are elected and sworn to hear tn
testimony and decide who struck first
a They may be able to agree, but the.
: must all agree and see the proof alike
or the case goes over for re-enact
!, ment of the solemn farce four or eigh
months hence. KS
II But, say they agree. They solemn
= march into court and say, "We find tn
= defendant guilty" .-.- .......
: Thereupon his honor fines the de
= PENDANT for this grave offense, one do
- lar and the costs. .s ......- .--..
Now, this is fair statement of tn
!. practice under our present system, i
all misdemeanor cases. And il is thi
ridiculous system of criminal procedure
having precedence, as it does, owe
civil litigation, that has almost drive
men from the use of the means provld
d ed in our courts of law for settling thei
l. rights -. p"
There is still another feature OF on
system equally unfortunate and eve
n more to be deplored, which will nj
20 tice in my next. -