Mohave County miner., 1885-02-15
COUNTY COURTS.

The erection OF county courts, ad-
vocated by some OF the mer,bers Of
the Legislature is, in our opinion, q
measure which should DO adopted
Those who oppose the passasge of a
Law TO effect this cad, members Of our
legislative body and some of the rep
resentativss Of ths press Of the Terri
tory; base their opposition upon the
ground that the establishment Of
these courts must of very necessity
increase taxation.
We do not see that this must be SO.
o. the power which creates the court
can also regulate all its operations.
and there is no necessity for EN-.
ploying all the old complicated. leg
endary otch-potch to the machine
which griRds out justice between
men. Why, il justices court ssn te
sustained in every precinct 10 settle
and adjust claims amounting to $500
without being drain upon the tax,
payers, cannot higher conrt with q
wider jurisdiction be established up.
on the same plan! What sense or
justice will say that the same system
which iD1risons malefactor for siz
months cannot, without material jar,
be ey.ended to cases inflioting a
higt OF punishment2 Why, If a Jus
tics's Court, which % far as the rules
II law affecting mems rigdts are con.
,erned, can do justice, cannot higher
curt established and supporteI on
tht same plan reach the Same md by
the same means. ..
II . notion that corruption might
creep in is not sufficieIt 10 have
wsigb in the consider ition Of this
matter. A Judge that would be infu
enced BY the simple question OF fees,
would be scorrps,t man anywhere.
We suggest again, as We have dom,
before, that we erect County Courts,
the judges Of which shall be paid b.,
fees az are now Justices ofthe Peace.
That these courts have conclusive
appellate jurisdiction Of cases ap
pealed from Justices Counts.
The Office of Probate Judge could
bs united with that Of County Judge.
and the salary now pail to the Pro-
bate Judge would cover the amount
necessary TO he paid by tho taxpsy
srs for criminal prosecutions.
Some system mnst be adopted
which will lessen the delay which il
unavoidable under our present plan
Men must not be subjected to such
great inconvenience, loss Of time, and
fearful expense as under our presenl
jurisprudeBce seems inevitable. with
out some effort on the part Of oui
Legislators TO amep1 the defective
laws.
The adoption Of the CUis -ysteiI
has in many States and soms Terri
tories, msasurably in this, swept awsJ
many OF tho cobwebs that fsstoonet
the practice Of the profession Of law
aud has particularly simplifsd ;h'
plsadings.A glorious iunosation mad
by common sense; simple applies
tion Of logical reasoning To the ssser
tion Of legal rights. When the code
simplifying pleading vera first enact
Cd every lawyer almost al first blush
regarded them as innovations dan
gerous to justice; ss breaking down
Of barriers erected by the indicial
wisdom Of ages around ths rights o
men; but the result has proven ths
value of the chaugs. The plan which
We suggest is sn innovation but i
simplifes and is, We think, reasona
bly, likely to make the administration
Of justice speedy, certain and inez
psnsivs to the public. We csnno
for the life OF rs Sos, il . jur,
summoned to decide e case involviaI
$500 IN q Justices court, can decid
correctly, why the same jury, coult
not if summoned 10 the same way 10
. County Court decide correctly,
case involving a claim OF $1,000.