The Farmington times. (Farmington, St. Francois County, Mo.) 1905-1926, 1922-02-24
JURISDICTION OF REFEREE AND
JUVENILE PROBATION OFFICER


-------A---- y5t 5i4F
The article entitled i'EThe Power and
Jurisdiction of the Referee to Hear
Juvenile Cases., which appeared in
The Pennington Times for February
II, 1922, under the signature OF r. 9.
Tucker, was not only inaccurate, but
misleading. Mr.. Tucker seemed to be
possessed with the impression that
the referee, however appointed and
however wilful and erroneous he
might be in his findings, had the final
voice in regard to juvenile affairs. He
also left the impression that juvenile
laws enacted by the legislature of
Missouri were wholly within the
scope and jurisdiction of the circuit
Judge. These impressions are mac
curate. In the first place, Mr.. Tucker
is the duly appointed probation Of
ficer of 81. Francois county. Section
1146 of the Revised Statutes (1919)
of Missouri provides as follows;
whenever there is to be a child
brought before the court under this
law, it shall be the duty of the clerk
of said court to so notify the proba-
ton officer in ADVANCE. 1t shall be
the duty of the probation officer to
make such investigation of the child
as may be required by the court, to
be present in court at the hearings of
all cases, and to furnish to the court
such information and assistance as
the Judge may require, and to take
charge of any child before and after
hearing, as may be directed by the
court, Probation officers shall have
all the powers of peace officers any
where in the state for the purposes Of
this article" 1t is clear that this sec
'tion makes probation officer the
peace officer of the Juvenile court. 1t
is, therefore, just as inconsistent and
Just as preposterous for the sheriff OF
st. Francois county to sit as judge
in the cases where he had made ar
rest and had the custody of the pris-
oner as it is for the probation officer
Of st. Francois county to sit as
Judge in the cases which he has in
vestigated in advance and reported to
the circuit court 1t may be that MIR.
Tucker has acted fairly in all matters
that have come before him, but if he
has, he is possessed with more than
ordinary human prudence and delib-
Grafton. The law never intended that
the man who had made an arrest, or
who had attempted to obtain evidence
against the party accused, should sit
as a judge to try the person whom he
had arrested, and to hear the evidence
which he himself had obtained.
On the 23rd of December, 1921, by
order of the circuit judge, a number
of rules were formulated to govern
iuyenile practice in st. Francois coun-
ty. Mo. Rule "C' provides as fol-
lows: an case of the absence Or in
ability Of the Circuit Judge to hold
said court, he may call in any other
Circuit Judge to perform that duty,
or he may appoint referee to hear
such cases as provided by Section
1885 of the revised Statutes of Mis-
souri,, 1919" Rule sd" provides as
follows: "Any Referee appointed in
pursuance of any order Of reference,
shall before proceeding to hear any
cause or testimony, shall file his ap-
pointment in writing with the Circuit
Clerk, and shall take and subscribe an
oath before the Circuit Clerk of this
court. I'm accordance with Chapter
IL, Article Id, of the Revised Statutes
of Missouri 1912. Rule "E" pro-
vides as follows: "The Referee in any
cause or matter, shall file his report in
writing, reciting the time and place,
the account and parties, and all other
proceedings had, and return the same
to the next regular term of the Cir
cult Court" 1t will be seen from these
three rules that it is the intention of
the court that the referee, when duly
appointed, shall hear the testimony
and file his report. 1t is apparent
that the court does not intend that the.
referee shall have the final voice in
Juvenile affairs; it does not intend
that the party dealt with shall be
sentenced or released upon the ter
ptination of the referees hearing. 1t
can only mean that the referee may
conduct the hearing, then make re-
port of his hearing to the circuit
Judge, who may or may not sustain
the referees report.
The juvenile laws deal with indi-
viduals, with acts of individuals, in
the same manner as do the laws gov
erning adults. 1t is erroneous to say
that because child is being prosecut-
ed that he should be subjected TO the
prejudices and imperfections of any
Judge, however wise and however fair
chat judge might be. In fact; the
laws clearly presume that more lib
erality should be extended to children
in the administration and in enforce
ment of the laws than is extended to
mature people.
1t is not my intention to interfere
with any act of proper tribunal,
which is legal and proper, but ! do
contend most vigorously that the pro-
baton officer of this county is not the
proper officer to try and sentence
children whom he has apprehended
and whom he has made diligent effort
to convict before the day set for trial.
The laws of the circuit court that l
have quoted above clearly forbid such
conduct on the part of the probation
officer. But even more clearly do the
laws regulating and governing juvenile
conduct and juvenile court procedure,
as set out in the Revised Statutes of
Missouri 1919, forbid such practice
and conduct on the part of the proba-
tion officer
W. "A. BRooKsHIRE.
-! --L-A---------z