For The North Carolina Standard.
The Administration of Justice in


North CarOIina.-fNO. 81
{"newspaper_name": "The North-Carolina standard.", "edition": "01", "page": "p3", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 5131, "word_count": 917, "ccnet_language_score": [0.958899974822998], "ccnet_perplexity": [908.7999877929688], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
magistrate, bur not duty, suors must Of necessi-
ty soicitther attendance on the BENCH and solicit
tation leads directly to corruption that it is only
another name for it. Without alleging that cor
rupton in fact exists in any other sense than that
judicial conduct is frequently influenced by feel
ings of gratitude or friendship, which natural
and in private station laudable, it is sufficient to
show tha, this system throws wide open the doors
for its entrance. The possibility for more, the
probability of it, is fatal objection which does
not require to be urged. .s- .sss


1t may be said in extenuation Of the evils we
have presented, that the County Courts do not in
practice instruct the jury on the law Of the case
arising on the facts but the whole question of fact
and law is left to the jury without instruction.
And this is true, although the Court necessarily
decides all questions to the adfnssibity of evi
dence and all other collateral questions, and many
others not arising in the course of jury trials, and
passes judgment in criminal cases. But bad as
is the theory of the system, we are far from re-
garding the practice any extenuation of its evils
1t only shews that from the admitted incompetency
of the tribunal to discharge its duties they devolve
on another body, never created and if possible still
less competent for that purpose That juries
should decide on the law is contrary to the spirit
of the common law, and studiously reprobated by
it as introductory OF capricious and arbitrary
uncertainty. All the eulogies ever passed by
Blackstone or Montesque on trial by jury have
been in reference to it as tribunal for the ascer-
tainment of facts alone, according to its theory.
To withdraw from it as far as possible all other
questions was the end and object Of the whole
elaborate system of pleading


A summary view of the constitution of the
Court presents to us


I. Judges without any knowledge of the law
they administer


2. Receiving no compensation, and therefore
without motive to discharge their duty;


8. A court constantly varying in its constituent
Judges, and consequently q practice devoid of
consistency; -.-e. s.-.s-


4. Judges solicited by suitors to try particular
cases.


We are not aware of any other civilized State
whose judicial system is founded on similar prin-
cipIes or subject TO similar exceptions. The his
torical fact is that this part of our system was
adopted when, from the circumstances of the coun-



venient that could be, and since then, from our
proverbial apathy to reform, has never undergone
deliberate revision. Whether the time has not
arrived when that revision should be made and so
important branch of government as that which
dlspenses justice to the people be settled on princi
pies which will bear the examination of reason,
is for the Legislature to say.


Hha of Eook
scnted to jury for decision is entitled to attention.
but as it is the same in the County as in the Supe
rior Courts we reserve our remarks on this part
of the system until we come to a consideration Of
those Courts: the rather as it is an evil not exist
ing in the theory of the system but engraed on it
BY usage


An appeal is given from every final judgment
of the County to the Superior Courts There are
some particularly important cases in which ap-
peals are not allowed where they should be, of
which amendments of the record are instances
but we now considering the general rule. |
The appeal carries up the whole case both of law
and fact. Some may be disposed to regard this
right of appeal as antidote 10 the evils of the
whole system. 1t may be admitted that without
his they would be absolutely intolerable; but we
regard it by means as a sufficient antidote. In
4 very bungling way it corrects some evils, and
introduces others. If it be admitted that the deci-
sion below will probably be wrong land we think
he extreme probability of this has been sufficient
y established and that il is to be set right by the
appeal then the preliminary trial is at best but
useless delay and expense but bungling mode
Of nstituting suit in the ultimate tribunal To re-
gard it in this view is palpably to admit the alb
surdity of the system. t-i,c z.. .aa5 e. a


No party can obtain an appeal without first
giving surety to satisfy the ultimate Judgment and
here as in most other cases, the evils of bad sys
tenn fall with peculiar severity on the class which
most needs the protection of the laws A poor
man, particularly if defendant, is in effect de-
prved of the right, and must m most cases submit
10 the decision of tribunal which it is probable
is wrong. No man conversant with Courts will
deny that the direst injustice is often the result
The plaintiff Chooses his tribunal, and one of the
most usual in determining the Sc
lection, is whether the defendant will be able to
appeal A man of wealth hand influence in a con-
roversy with a poor man not only has superior
chances of success from the operation of those
means in the Justices Court if he chooses to use
hem. but also from the number oftribunals through
which he can run he not only plays with loaded