those courts, which, by the constitution of Pennsylvania, form the juridical establishment for every county in the commonwealth.

In England, the general or quarter sessions of the peace is a court of record held, in every county, once in every quarter of the year. It is held before two or more justices of the peace, for the execution of that authority, which is conferred on them by the commission of the peace, and a great variety of acts of parliament.

By the statute of 34 Ed. III. c. 1, the court of general quarter sessions have authority to hear and determine all felonies and trespasses whatever done in the county in which they sit. But they seldom try any greater offences than small felonies; remitting crimes of a heinous nature to the assizes, for a more public and solemn trial and decision. There are many offences, which ought to be prosecuted in the quarter sessions, as belonging particularly to the jurisdiction of that court. Of this kind are the smaller misdemeanors, not amounting to felony; such as offences relating to the highways, taverns, vagrants, and apprentices. It has cognizance also of controversies relating to the settlement and provision for the poor, and orders for their removal. It cannot try any newly-created offence, without an express authority given by the statute, which creates it.1

In Pennsylvania, the courts of quarter sessions of the peace are formed upon the model, and exercise jurisdiction according to the practice of the courts of the same denomination in England. In one important particular, however, there is a very material difference between them. The courts of quarter sessions in England are composed of the justices of the peace, who hold their commissions only during the pleasure of the crown: those in Pennsylvania are

1 Wood. Ins. 499. 4 Bl. Com. 268.

composed of the judges of the court of common pleas, who hold their commissions during their good behavior.1

Thus much concerning the court of quarter sessions. In each county, and in such convenient districts as are directed by law, the governor of Pennsylvania appoints a competent number of justices of the peace."

To the common law, the conservation of the peace has always been an object of the most particular attention and regard. Long before the institution of justices of the peace was known, many officers were, ex officio, or by election. or by particular appointment, guardians of the public tranquillity-conservatores pacis.3

When quarrels suddenly arise-when violence is committed-when riots and tumults are likely to ensue, it is vain to wait for the interposition of the ordinary courts of justice. That cannot be obtained soon enough for preventing or suppressing the disorders. It is highly important, therefore, that men of character and influence, to whom, upon any emergency, application may be easily made, should be invested with sufficient power to arrest disorderly persons, to confine them, and to preserve or restore the quiet of the country.

66

The peace, in the most extensive sense of the term, comprehends the whole of the criminal law. Against the peace," all crimes are laid to be committed. Whoever, therefore, had authority to take cognizance of crimes was, from the nature of his office, considered as a conservator of the peace. The king himself was styled its great conservator through all his dominions. His judges and his ministers of justice were also official conservators of the peace. Others were conservators by tenure or prescription. Others, again, were elected in the full county court, in pursuance of a writ directed to the sheriff.

1 Cons. Penn. art. 5, ss. 7, 2.

2 Cons. Penn. art. 5, s. 10.

3 Millar, 433.

Be

sides all these, extraordinary conservators of the peace were appointed by commissions from the king, as OCcasion required. They were to continue, says my Lord Bacon, for the term of their lives, or at the king's pleasure. For this service, adds the same great authority, choice was made of the best men of calling in the county, and but few in the shire. They might bind any man to keep the peace, and be of the good behavior; and they might send for the party, directing their warrant to the sheriff or constable to arrest the party and bring him before them.

This it was usual to do, when complaint was made, upon oath, by any one, that he stood in fear of another; or when the conservator himself saw the disposition of any man inclined to a breach of the peace, or to misbehave himself in some outrageous manner. In such cases, the conservator might, by his own discretion, send for such a fellow, and, as he should see cause, oblige him to find sureties for the peace, or for his good behavior. If he refused to find them, a commitment to jail would be the unavoidable consequence.

Those, who were conservators of the peace by virtue of their offices, still retain the character and power: those, who became so by election or appointment, are superseded by the justices of the peace.1

Of this institution, says my Lord Coke, it is such a form of subordinate government for the tranquillity and quiet of the realm, as no part of the Christian world hath; provided it be duly executed.

The power of the justices of the peace arises from two different sources-their commission, and acts of parliament, which have created the objects of their jurisdiction.

By his commission, every justice is appointed a con14 Ld. Bac, 59, 99. 1 Bl. Com: 349. 2 Reev. 122.

2 4 Ins. 170.

servator of the peace, and is vested with a separate power to suppress riots and affrays, to take securities for the peace or good behavior; and for defect of sureties may commit to the common jail or house of correction. For treason, felony, or breach of the peace, he may commit even a fellow-justice.1

The powers, which, by acts of parliament, have been conferred, from time to time, upon one, two, or more justices of the peace, are accumulated to such a degree as to form a jurisdiction of immense variety and importance. They are so many and so great that, as Sir William Blackstone observes, the country is greatly obliged to any worthy magistrate, who, without sinister views of his own, will engage in this troublesome service. For this reason, he is protected, by many statutes, in the honest discharge of his office; and, for any unintentional error in his practice, great indulgence is shown to him in the courts of law. On the other hand, tyrannical abuses of his office are punished with the merited severity; and all persons, who recover a verdict against him, for a wilful or malicious. injury, are entitled to double costs.

In England, a justice of the peace holds his office only during the pleasure of the king: by the constitution of Pennsylvania, he holds it during his good behavior. He may be removed on conviction of misbehavior in office, or of any infamous crime, or on the address of both houses of the legislature.3

The presidents of the courts of common pleas, within their circuits, and the other judges, within their several counties, are justices, of the peace, so far as relates to criminal matters.

This distinction, suggested by the constitution, brings into our view a very important branch of the power of a

1 Wood, Ins. 80,

3 Cons. Penn. art. 5, s. 10.

21 Bl. Com. 354.

Id. art. 5 s. 9.

justice of the peace. He possesses civil as well as criminal jurisdiction in Pennsylvania, and decides concerning property as well as concerning offences. This branch of his power deserves a particular consideration.

The easy, the regular, and the expeditious administration of justice has, in every good government, been an object of particular attention and care. To the attainment of an object so interesting, the distribution of the juridical powers among convenient districts is highly conducive. Such distribution, therefore, has, in many states, been made with a degree of precision suited to its importance. Every citizen should be always under the eye and under the protection of the law and of its officers: each part of the juridical system should give and receive reciprocally an impulse in the direction of the whole.

In Athens, there was a grade of magistrates, who, in the several districts, had jurisdiction of suits, when the sum in controversy did not exceed ten drachms. They had cognizance also of actions of assault and battery.1

Arbitrators likewise acted a very considerable part on the juridical theatre of Athens. There were two kinds of them. One kind consisted of those, who were drawn by lot to determine controversies, in their own tribe, concerning demands, which exceeded ten drachms in value. Their sentence was not final; for if either of the contending parties thought himself injured by it, he might appeal, for redress, to a superior court of justice.2 Arbitrators of the other kind were such as the parties themselves chose to determine the controversy between them. From the determination of these arbitrators, the law permitted no appeal. But they took an oath to give their sentence without partiality.3

We have seen and traced the importance of the county 1 Gil. Lys. & Isoc. 489. 1 Pot. Ant. 122.

31 Pot. Ant. 123.

21 Pot. Ant. 122.