The Abbeville messenger. (Abbeville, S.C.) 1884-1887, 1885-10-14
Our Trial Justice System.

TfSF.
The trial justice system, which has
been made the subject of so much cor
respondencc in your valuable paper, has
always been a vexed question in the
| Legislature.
1t twas never more than an experiment;
an attempt to provide for the changed
condition Of our population. The OK
pertinent has not proved a success. The
problem is what can be substituted in
| its stead?
In the summer Of 1877 the House ju-
dietary committc, in special session, de-
voted many days TO the discussion vf
this question. Three plans were pre-
scntcd and earnestly discussed. Noone
Of these obtained the concurrence of a
majority Of the committee, and all of
them were reported to the House with
out recommendation. When the report
came in, it soon appeared impracticable
to obtain the approval Of the House for
any one Of the plans reported. And the
matter was postponed indefinitely. Since
that time the question has come up in
one shape or another. No one has solved
the problem.
Theoretically the present system is a
good one. Its purposes are to secure n
speedy disposition. o! small matters in
litigation with the least possible eX
penditure Of time and money to TIE
litigants, and to punish promptly the
minor breaches Of the criminal law To
these ends the State is divided into Ger
tain small districts, AMI for each distric:
there is Il justice. He is named by the
Governor and is appointed by and with
the advice and consent Of the Senate. Of
course it is impossible for the Governor
to know the qualifications OF the very
large number Of persons. (about four
hundred in all.) who arc appointed to
this office. He must rely therefore upon
information OH this point. On whom in
theory could he better rely than upon
| those who have been selected by the
people of the county rs their representa-
tivcs in the Legislature. In this way, it
wonld seem, proper persons could be
chosen to administer justice in matters
so small as not TO warrant the expense
and trouble Of trial in the Circuit
| Courts.
The system: however, has failed to
give satisfaction. II is not cas- to say
why this is so. 1t cannot be because the
Office is underpaid. Trial justices are
not underpaid in this county. We say
this judging by the best test, the COM
petition for vacancies in the office. At
the last selection there were four candi-
dates for the position Of judicial trial
justice, each one Of them competent
man. There were six candidates, at
least, for ministerial justice, and the
choice between them was very mar
row.
We believe that, if We can judge by
the same tests, the same result would
appear in the other counties, 1t may be
that the best men are unwilling to spare
the time from their other avocations to
discharge the duties Of the office. 1t
would be impossible throughout the
State to make the office the sole support
Of the persons holding it. There are
four hundred trial Justices in this State.
An average of $500 eachwould be $780,
600 per annum.
1t cannot be that good men cannot be
found for this Office. There are many
excellent trial justices in the State.
Perhaps the difficulty may exist in this,
that the jurisdiction of the Courts IS
based on the amount, and not on the
character Of the question involved.
Frequently cases come up before these
justice which would puzzle the best
judges. They may have too great lat
itlde in preliminary examinations in
criminal cases. Perhaps this power
ought to be taken away from sin
gle justices. Whatever may be the
reason it is evident that the System
is unpopular. In q country like ours
this is enough. No law not sustained
by public opinion can be properly en-
forced.
The question then is, what substitute
can be found for the trial justice sys-
tenn None can be found which can
accomplish the full results sought in
this system, cheap, prompt justice,