The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1912-08-06
HAS YOUR STATE
ENOUGH G
An Inquiry Which Bears on Some Of
the Most Urgent Problems of
the Present Day.
BY A. 3. ANDREWS, JR.,
OF the Raleigh Bar.

70 call a person Judge" in the
hearing of the average American citi-
yen, especially if he be Of an inuuir-
inS mind, is usually to invite the
question, O what court is he judge?"
and the further inquiry whether his
court can hang a man or send him to
the State Penitentiary. or whether it
can deprive a citizen of his property?
Some one has humOrOusiy observed
that the judges of the past generation
~rrr usually severe and stern men,
who believed in hanging, hell fire
and castor OIL The judges Of the
appellate courts are likewise respect
ed by all, but in them, dealing only in
questions Of law on appeal. the citf-
zens do not take the same interest as
they do in those judges whose every
day work in the course Of the. year.,
brings them ia elbow touch with all
grades, classes and conditions Of our
people.
1t IS, therefore, to the so-called trial
judges. or. TO properly designate
them, the judges Of the courts of gen.
eral Jurisdiction, that the inquiry,
which is the title Of this article, re-
fers. and to the solution Of which in
Quiry no universal rule can be laid
down for every State. But the expe-
rience, whether satisfactory or not,
OF each State can help others in its
solution.
All will agree with the plain state
ment that there should be provided a
sufficient number Of judges to prop
erly transact the business of the
courts. both civil and criminal. Yet
what is a sufficient number to transact
that business is q matter about which
people can, and will COnScientiOuSly,
differ, as each one will not lave the
same facts before him; and men OF
practical judgment decide matters
with the light before them as they
see it.
In these days of undertaking writ
ers, inf1a ming the mind against a calm
and deliberate consideration Of pub
lie matters, it is Oftcn-times difficult
to arrive at the facts concerning any
public question. 1t is popular today
TO cry against the Laws Delay and
generally to condemn the judicial sys-
tenn Of America, some few going SO
far as to advocate recall of all public
officials (Judges included), and that
an absolute preSent-day majority rule
whose sympathies may change over
night be substituted for our system
of representative government by the
people, in which the minority is pro-
tected in it's rights against oppression
by the majority, while the majority is
given free rein to pass and enforce
any law that does not override the
fundamental law made by the people
Tor their government and protection.
For the Laws Delay the writer
"a lawyer) has no excuse to make, nor
apology to offer. In numerous cases
It exists; in the large majority Of in
stances it can, and should be, cor
recied. and the means OF cOrrecuon,
almost without exception, are within
the power of the law-makine body OF
each State. and can easily be pro-
videu. The scope of this article. and
its broad subject, precludes discuss
ing such delays as are incident to
legal procedure. professional courtesy
appeal and error, expensive litigation.
and lOng-prOtracted trials, yet later
on the article viii call attention to
one fruitful source Of the laws de-
lay, especially in the larger cities and
the older and more pOpulous states
east Of the Mississippi river.
1t is easy to find fault with ano
condemn an existing condition thai
does not in every way meet popular
approval. That is the especial pr1V1-
lego of the d~emagogue and fault
finder. and almost the sole financia
support and livelihood Of the muck.
raking writer and lecturer.
The people justly honor, respec'
ana follow one who not only point:
out defects in existing present-day al
fdirs, but also suggests a practlca
remedy in each instance by which tn
people themselves may better the OBJ
pettionable conditions. Therein lie
the difference between a statesman o.
political economist on the one hand
and a demagogue or Pathfinder OF
the other. The American people al
ways try to be fair in deciding Ques
tons and their sober second thought
their deliberate judgment. is alway
better than the impulse Of the mo
mtnt.
What is a court Of general jurisdic
ton. and how small a case can it try
The jurisdiction varies from an.
amount howsoever small in Maine
New Hampshire, New Jersey, Ne1
York. Oregon, Pennsylvania and Utah
to $500 in Connecticut, Rhode Islam
and Texas. 1t is $40 in Virginia.; IS
IN Alabama, Alaska, Delaware, Ha
waii, kentucky. Louisiana, Maryland
Montana, Tennessee and West Wiz
ginia: 500 in Arizona, Arkansas. Dis