The Grenada sentinel. [volume] (Grenada, Miss.) 1868-1955, 1914-10-30

by request of several readers this Editorial which appeared in The Sentinel of last week
Among the several constitutional amendments which are to be
submitted TO the electorate of Mississippi at the election, November
}, is one to provide for three more judges of the State Supreme
court. Certain lawyers are interesting themselves very much in the
proposition, some of them, we believe, for the reason that they hope
to Jump into one of the new, fat places sought to be created. The
argument is put forth that the work OF the Supreme Court is very
much congested and that litigarts are compelled to wait too long
for the final determination of cases appealed to the Supreme Court;
lit is also urged that three Judges, which is now the number o n the
bench, can not properly handle the great number of cases which are
appealed from the lower courts to that tribunal, both of which are
correct. But the question arises: Will it not take six judges just
TWICE AS LONG to read a record and hunt up authorities bearing on
any particular case as it take; three judges? There can be but one
answer, and that is, yes" this being true then, where does the mat
ter of expedning business come in? The advocates of the amend
ment will answer and say that the six judges will sit n two divisions,
each with coordinate authority: The amendment offered which pro-
vides for the sitting in two divisions reads as follows:
The Supreme Court shall have power, under such rules and
each, any two of whom when convened shall form a quorum; each
division shall have full power to hear and adjudge all causes that
may be assigned to it by the court; In event the Judges compos-
ing any division shall differ IS to the Judgment to be rendered in
and in a manner TO be fixed by the rules to be adopted by the
court, shall certify that in his opinion any decision of any division
al ay TN" diy SGE5r Is th ,n ona te eause 'h shall R'T then G be- cons Uied re tU%d adj G.
Judged by the full court or a quorum thereof
1t is not unreasonable to expect that a vast majority of the cases
handled by either of the two divisions of three judges each will
have to be passed upon by the full court. Every man has a certain
pride in sustaining his own opinions and where there is a disagree
ment among the three judges" of one division, the dissenting JUS
tce will most probably certify" his disagreement to the full bench
where the whole matter will again have to be gone over, and in place
of making time, time will be lost.
in the Supreme Court is somewhat analogous to the doctors treat
ment OF a patient where he was uncertain in his diagnosis. He threw
his patient into fits and then undertook to cure the fits with the re-
suit that the undertakers services were soon in demand. They are
beginning at the wrong end of the line to benefit the public and to
meet the ends of justice. In place of beginning at the top of the ju
dietary system o. the state, we should begin at the bottom-in the
inferior courts. Trivial cases should not be allowed an appeal to the
Supreme Court. Civil cases where the amount involved does not
lexceed $3.50 should be barred from appeal. This in the end would
benefit the litigant. Most frequently petty lawsuits are prolonged
through spite or bull medicines and the man who wins is a loser
A poor compromise is better than a good lawsuit. Misdemeanors
except where the circumstances are unusual or extraordinary, shoulc
be denied an appeal to the Supreme Court. The State can not ap
lpeal in any criminal case and it does appear that where a man has
his case passed up to the trial court by eighteen grand jurors anc
then his cause heard by twelve petit jurors in the county where he
t resides, that every opportunity has been given him to get justice ane
Y tina. it IS not right TO further clog the wheels of the courts with hi
|misdoings or pleadings. OF course this might occasionally work
e 4 hardship and an injustice, but is indeed hard to adhere to any line
of public policy which at times does not bear heavily upon some
s one; but we must not forget that the theory of on government il
d "the greatest good to the greatest number" We recognize the fac
that the limitation of appeals would tend to minimize litigation, the
very thing the lawyer does not want, but we should no. legislate fol-
n lawyers or for any other class but that should be done which is bes
S for all the people. Our courts cost too much and the lawyers arr
t largely to blame for it. Our court procedure needs radical revision