New Iberia enterprise and independent observer. (New Iberia, La.) 1902-1944, 1902-10-25
ANDREW THORPE.

The Louisiana Bar Association this
morning held meeting in the library Mt
the Civil District Court and adopted the
following self-explanatory resolution on
the motion of BENJAMIN Il. Forman, duly
secouded
Resolved. That this association believes
that the proposed amendments to Articles
| So. ps. 80, l05 and 13l OF the Constitution
| Of the state of Louisiana, relative to tho
Judiciary department, are unwise and
should be rejected ut the approaching
election. aud that we urge our fellow citi-
zens to vote against said amendments.
and we now state briefly the grounds OF
our objections as follows.
Insofar AZ these amendments provide
for Courts Of Appeals in the country par.
ishes we feel that our fellow members Of
the bar residing In those parishes are more
competent to form correct judgment as
TO the necessity of such courts than we
are. and IL the amendments were 30
drafted as to allow the voter to cast his
vote in favor Of the establishment of such
courts without affecting 80 radically the
jurisdiction OF che Supreme Court, we
should feel disposed to remain silent
but the effect Of these amendments. II
adopted, will, in our opinion, so seriously
impair the usefulness Of the highest court
IN the state that we feel justified In
briefly submitting our views to our fellow
citizens.
Tho jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
Of this state wns. by the Constitutions Of
1879, 1S45. 1862 and 1864 extended to all
cases involving over $780, The Consti
tuition Of 1858 raised this amount to $500.
Tho Constitution of 1879 raised II to
&I 900. An amendment passed in 1884
raised 10 to $4,000. The Constitution OF
1903 left the figures where Il found them.
nj - ,O00 but now In 1909 &c IL proposed
to raise the lower limit OF the Jurisdiction
Of that court to cases involving more than
$4,000.
We therefore feel that the tendency has
been TO convert the Supreme Court Of the
state into rich mans court, and to re-
move it further and further from the body
Of tho people. and that If this high limit
TO the jurisdiction of the court be estab-
ished great mass Of people in the com
munity will have no interest in the court, |
or in Its decisions, and That tho Law ex-
pounded by that court will be subject to
the prejudice which will necessarily exist
against the court ns rich man court.
More suffering both physical and mental,
IL often inflicted In cases involving but |
few dollars and affecting very poor persons
than eases involving very large sums aud
affecting persons of large wealth, whose
comfort IL not, In any manner, affected
by the decision in such cases.
While we are not prepared to give accu-
rate figures, we feel that we are not far
wrong in estimating that. II the proposed
amendments be adopted, one third OF the |
State in territorial extent will have no |
further practical interest In the Supreme |
Court, foi the reason that the appeals from |
fully onethrd Of the parishes In the state |
practically never involve 30 much az
$4,000 We therefore feel that the effect |
OF these amendments will be to constitute |
a court before which the bar of one third |
OF tho State will never appear, and In |
which that bar will have no interest what
ever.
II should be noted In this connection
that no State In the American Union has
ever fixed the lower limit OF the jurisdic.
ton OF its Supreme Court Mt figures m /
the amount at which the people |
Of this state will Ak the lower limit Of the
jurisdiction OF our Supreme Court II the
be adopted. In many, even
Of the richest States, no constitutional
provisions will be found basing the right
Of appeal upon the amount involved in
litigation, and Il IL especially noteworthy
hat New York, the richest State In the
Union, leaves large discretion to her
Legislature Ia reference to the Jurisdiction
,f her highest appellate court, but by her
expressly prohibits that Leg.
stature from ever making the right Of ap.
peal dependent upon the amount involved.
II may be stated, without fear OF con
radiction, that most Of the great princi.
ples in every system of Jurisprudence have
been laid down In causes Involving but
'mal amounts OF money.
The usefulness Of supreme tribunal,
lnder any system, lies chiefly In the fact
hat II constructs the laws Of the State and
ays down rules OF action for the lower
,ourts. Most commercial cases, and the ,
arge mass Of litigation affecting contracts
md conflicting titles and rights and privil- .
gcs upon property, are cases involving
ess than 81, 900 aud these cases, under
he new system, are to be relegated TO I
htce courts Of appeals. whose jurisprud- /
nee must necessarily become extremely .
divergent.
II Il be necessary TO adopt some meas-
lre to enable the Sapreme Court to dispose 4