The Ouachita telegraph. [volume] (Monroe, La.) 1865-1889, 1889-08-24

md appellate capacity and that 10 the
sesentiai purpose for which any Judi y
cIal system ought 10 be framed. lc
But the people say that 1t is too
poetiy, and their object In changing Il
seems to be- chiefly TO diminish the
cost. ~
This 10 all right enough, provided
the system adopted shalt prove equally
= aflectlve as that we now have.
Under the present system, appeals
lie from the District Court 70 the Court
Of Appeals In all civil cases where the
amount In dispute exceeds 500, ana
"a the Supreme Court where such
amount exceeds $1,000.
! Seven-tenths Of the litigation origs-
mating In the District Courts Involves
amounts less than $1,000.
II the Court Of Appeals should Dc
abolished, without making any pro-
vision for vesting Its Jurisdiction IN
some other courts, 1t would follow that
everl.tentbs Of those who have ousi'
ness Ia our courts would be deprived
Of the right Of appeal.
THIS right Is too valuable 10 Do
trified with, and no considerations OF
economy should be permitted TO
abrldge It.
This Is simply truth. The. Court Of
Appeals IL the most valuable court
known TO our judiciary. Its decisions
do as complete justice, and ito interpre-
tation OF the law is as sound, and az
consonant with juriprudence and
Iprinclple a. the highest court in the
Hand. And above all, II Is q cheap
court It goes 10 the very doors OF the
llitigant, and relieves him Of the oner-
GUS expense OF transcripts, and printed
briefs, and extra attorneys fees; and
!, moreover 1t stays at the door, of the
, tlttigant until his case is presented, and
, tried, and all the delays allowed to
him by law have expired.
!, Does the August Supreme Court dc
so much? ~
n Let the members of the country bal
) answer.
+ The abolition of the Court of Ap-
s peals seems, nevertheless, 10 be ella.
. morously demanded by those editors
and Farmers Alliances. who have
I depressed an opinion on the matter
None of them, however, has proposed
g any reform by which the people may
d be relieved Of the expense of THU
II court, aud yet enjoy the benefits !
!. confers upon them. All that it
!. thought necessary to be done is sim
: ply to yet rid OF the court and le
O litigants get along in the best way
n they can.
But this Is mere destruction, What
Il the people want la reconstruction
They want a judicial system less cost.
than, but equally effective as tn
e, present one, and, above all things, on'
that will secure to every man righ
N to appeal to higher court.
ID Yes, we want, shalt certainly need
a! reconstruction, il We permit the leone
"a clasls to tear down our existent system
D. The newspapers, the country pres
y! particularly, have had grea
deal to say in objection to the judici
u airy eystom, and the special butt Of thei
rs objurgations has been the Court Of Ar
10 peals. Has any one of these eve
re suggested a better system9 Has an
one of these an original Idea on til
l. subject? Let courts and litigation COZ
what they may, the public need
that direction must be supplied. l
1879, the date of the adoption OF on
w system, it will not be denied that "
needed the court.
At present there are two rational Of
ljections, and two only, 10 the Circu
" Court.
The Supreme Court, behind wit
+ its work in 1879, is now fully abrea
with it, and needs no relief; but on tt
o' contrary is fully able, If 1t can spa
the time(?) to assume greater labor
The Circuit Courts have not enoug
:, Ibusiuess before them to keep thel
fully occupied.
Let the number OF the Circuits
decreased and the area of each circu
be Increased, aud let them hold OF
,o, session in each parish each year.
,r. With this modification, two circui
he would be ample to meet the preset
re demands of the people, and would r
no s,,o she coot and m eet the first Obie