Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 07.pdf/137

 112

to fill the benches of the courts of common pleas, it would be the safer way to commis sion them during good behavior." Ohio has not clung to the theory of long judicial terms as closely as have other states. One of the English judges not long ago frowned upon an American decision, because he said the terms of the judges were too short to insure good decisions, and hence English judges would not follow American decisions. That is too bad indeed. But the English judge is not altogether right, as in some states, and especially in the United States Courts, the judges have remained on the bench longer than have some English judges. The term of judges of supreme courts should not be less than ten years. Third Epoch : Under the First Constitu tion of 1802. — In 1802 the eastern division of the territory of the United States north west of the river Ohio became a State, the people in convention assembled at Chillicothe adopting a Constitution on the 29th day of November, 1802, by virtue of which the judicial power of the state, both as to mat ters of law and equity, was vested in a supreme court, courts of common pleas for each county, in justices of the peace, and in such other courts as the Legislature might establish. The Supreme Court con sisted of three judges, any two of whom constituted a quorum, the General Assembly being authorized to add another judge thereto after the term of five years, in which case the judges were authorized to divide into two circuits, within which any two of the judges could hold court. They were to be appointed by a joint ballot of both houses and to hold their office for a term of seven years if they so long behaved well. The old Supreme Court was the suc cessor of the territorial court. Briefly re ferring to the territorial epoch of the sketch, in forming the connecting link at this point, it will be remembered that the ordinance of provided for the appointment of

judges to form a court with common law jurisdiction." The Governor and judges of the North-western Territory, by act of Aug ust, 1788, denominated this a general court and provided for its sittings.2 The act of August, 1795, provided for holding a term of this court at Marietta and one at Cincinnati, in each year, for nisi prins courts for the trial of issues of facts.3 The act of 1800 provided for the transmission of the records with the postea endorsed and other proceedings necessary for the rendition of judgments to the General Court.4 After the state was organized in 1802, the state legis lature of April, 1803, abolished the General Court, and vested a portion of its jurisdiction in the Supreme Court, and transferred to it the judgments unsatisfied in the General Court. s By virtue of this transfer the rec ords remained in the Supreme Court of Hamilton County.6 Generally, and for most purposes, the old Supreme Court was a county court, not perhaps altogether so,7 it being held in Seely v. Blair (6 Ohio, 448) that although the Constitution required it to be held in each county in each year, yet there was no territorial limitation upon its authority, and it exercised certain functions operating be yond the county in which it might be then sitting.8 Its jurisdiction was varied, having concurrent jurisdiction with courts of com mon pleas to issue writs of error and cer tiorari; and the act 10 organizing courts gave original jurisdiction to the Supreme Court in all civil cases, both at law and equity, where the matter in dispute ex ceeded one thousand dollars, and appellate jurisdiction from the court of common pleas in all civil cases in which that court had original jurisdiction. It had no power to direct proceedings in 1 I Chase, 67. 2 I Chase, 97. I Chase, 149. 4 1 Chase, 359. 5W.6l2; I Ohio, 317; 3 Ohio, 483; I Chase, 359. 6 I Chase, 359; I O. 317; 3 O. 483. ' Wayne Tp. v. Green Tp. W. 292. 8 6 Ohio, 448; 5 Ohio, 249. « Barnes v. Decker, W. 207. 01 Swan (1841) 222, 43 Ohio Laws, 81, sec. 9.