Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1911-12-15


and superstitious were the judges and
everybody else. About the only thing
(which can be said in favor of these
lvery old decisions is that the judge:
lwere not influenced in the slightest by
the railroads.
The old common law judges re-
sisted every innovation upon their es
tablished forms, shut up every way
flor legal growth and utterly refused
ito permit any legal development; bu
one would naturally think that mod
ern judges would endeavor to render
decisions which would be least harm
full and most beneficial to society ol
to all parties concerned in the fu'
ture. They do so in the equity courts
but in the law courts they consider
nothing but how the same thing was
decided in the past. This most unfor-
Itunate practice not only prevents the
common law from being expurgated
but it prohibits any improved and
progressive ideas from being intro
duced into it; causing it to look al
ways backwards and never forwards
and to lag from one hundred to five
hundred years behind the business and
social conditions of the times. Can
anyone imagine his physicians con-
sulting the precedents in the same
way, and then bleeding dying con-
sumptives or cauterizing wounds with
a red-hot iron? Engineers keep their
profession up to date, and are able to
affirm the ideas which are old enough
to be in books are old enough to
be questioned, and no scientist could
be cited as an authority who believed
that the earth is fiat; yet the very
greatest Of all legal authorities, Black
stone, recites the law in regard to
witchcraft, expresses surprise thai
anyone could doubt the truth of 1t
and says: ITO deny the actual exis-
tence of it Is at once fatty to contra
dict the revealed word of God'-QV
| 6O). The. contemporaneous French
law was so far in advance of him tina,
lit declared there could be no such
thing as witchcraft and punished as
limpostors those who set themselves
up as professional witches.
Stability is the watchword Of ouI
law and not adaptability; therefore
when the acts of the legislative bodies
are in conflict with the common law
or with these established precedents
the law courts either declare the acts
Unconstitutional although no one
else can see that they are connected
in any way with anything in any con-
stitution, or they do their best tc
uphold the common law in spite
of the statutory laws. The judges
are in reality making the law
by establishing these precedents
with their conflicting decisions, and
have multiplied them until they fl
thousands of volumes and form
heterogeneous mass which no one Is
Is able to know or understand with
any degree of certainty. We know
this is true because in trials the law
yers always dispute with each other
about the law, and the judges are
continually reversing each others de-
cisions. The Romans had the same
experience, but reduced the unwield!
mass to twelve books. The Chinese
have reduced theirs to seven, although
they use very large characters In
printing.
No lawyer can possibly know sc
much law; consequently he does well
If he can but succeed in finding it, and
still better if he happens to under
stand it when he does find 1t. The
lawyers are not able to do anything
more than charge for their opinion
Eand advice. They disclaim any fur
ther responsibility, although they
have a maxim that Ignorance of the
law excuses no one" While this maxim
is notoriously and ridiculously false
it forbids the common people to say
they do not know the law, and they
have always been compelled to obey
1t, although, previous to 1880 all Eng
lish laws were written in Latin, which
they could not read. This difficulty In
understanding the law is increased by
the fact that the early English law
yers had a peculiar cant and jargor
of their own which no one else could
understand, and a handwriting which
no one else could read. Their fdioms
and much of their unique vocabulary
is retained to the present day. In
dictments and other legal instruments
are now written in the most nonsensi-
cal language. Often the judges them
selves cannot understand what declar-
ations and bills in equity are about
when they are read to them. Pleas
are demurred to and stricken out be-
cause they are in good, plain English
instead of the ridiculous jargon which
the rules require. 1t Is doubtful II
the lawyers themselves can under
stand this perplexing law language
very well; because we know that they
are continually bringing test cases be-
fore the courts in order to have the
law interpreted for them by the
judges.
The tangle is made more confusing
by legal fiction" which is introduced
surreptitiously under pretence OF rem
dering justice. In it statement Il
assumed to be a fact which is known
not to be a fact, but is not allowed 10
be contradicted. 1t is also legal nc
ton to assume that there is solemnity
I'm kissing a dirty court Bible, or tha'
doing so will extract the truth from
an expert witness when he Is well
paid. 1t is also a legal fiction to as
sumo that the presence of the judge
inspires feelings of respect and awe
in the breasts of intelligent people
when they know that most Of his de-
cisions are reversed on appeal. The
author has seen priests in heathen
temple make obeisance before an idol;
| 1nt nf loW in q