Evening star., 1897-02-17
JUSTICES OF THE PEACE
They Arc Competent 70 Hold Jury
Trials.
Important Decision Rendered by thu
Court of Appeals-Denning
Power of Justices.

| An opinion Of great Importance and in
| terest both to the public and to the legal
profession was rendered today by the Court
| Of Appeals. the court deciding that a Jury
trial before justice of the peace is a COM
| mon law trial by jury, such as is guaran-
teed by the Constitution; that justices of
| the peace have the right to instruct a Jury
as to the law and evidence, and may set
aside the verdict. and that from the judg-
| ment Of justice of the peace in a jury
| trial there Is no appeal.
The cases in which the decision were
rendered were those Of the Brightwood
Railway Company. appellant. against Jus
tice of the Peace Lewis 1. ONeal. and
Charles Hof. appellant, against the Capital
Traction Company. The cases were argued
and submitted in the Court Of Appeals
early last November. and the courts de-
cision has been awaited with great interest
Mr. Chief Justice Alvey dissented from
the majority of the court. Mr.. Justices
Morris and Shepard. the former writing the
| majority opinion. 1t is understood that
the matter will at once be carried to the
United States Supreme Court.
The cases involved the question Of the
extent of the jurisdiction Of justices of the
peace In the District, and of the right of
appeal from their judgments. In both cases
it was claimed that there is no such thing
as common law jury trial before Justices
OF the peace here. and the District Supreme
Court was asked to have the cases tried be-
fore the circuit branch of that tribunal
where such a jury trial is permitted, and
where the presiding justice Is permitted to
instruct the jury as to the law and evil
dence, and where the verdict can he ser
aside.
In the Brightwood railway case the lower
court held that there is no appeal from the
Judgment of justice of the peace render
ed In jury trial. In the Hof case the
claim was made in the lower court that
Jury trial before justice of the peace is
not such jury trial as Is guaranteed by
the Constitution. and that contention the
peals. in disposing of the two cases. af-
hrms the judgment Of the lower court in
the Brightwood railway case. and reverses
the lower court in the Hof case.
The majority opinion of the court Is one
of the longest ever filed in the court and
reviews at great length the laws applying.
IT Is pointed out that Congress Is not pro-
hibited by the Constitution from providing
common law jury before justices of the
peace in cases where the amount in con-
troversy so warrants. and 1t is held that
such has been the law here for nearly
seventy years. 1t is also pointed out that
at common law there Is no absolute right
or appeal So the court holds "the So
called right of appeal is not an absolute or
nalienable right Of parties, but that 1t may
be given. regulated or taken away by act
of Congress without violation of any in
herent right" To hold otherwise. says the
court. would not only affect the title to
numerous lots of ground here, which have
been transferred upon writs of execution,
but would likewise paralyze the admnis-
tration of justice here in all cases involv-
ing more than $40 and not more than S1OO
for then there would be no tribunal here
competent by law to take cognizance OF
such causes.
In conclusion, the court says that If the
continued exercise of the practice which
has prevailed here for seventy years has
become a source of hardship by reason of
the enlarged jurisdiction of justices of the
peace. and inexpedient for them to deal
with causes committed to them without
the appellate supervision of the courts Of
common law, it is for Congress. and not
for the courts. to apply the remedy. But -
further says the court "the Supreme Court
OF the District of Columbia may greatly
mitigate the evil if evil there is, in the
practice" by virtue of authority conferred
Upon said court by the acts Of 1867 and
1895.