French Law and Law Courts.
417
FRENCH LAW AND LAW COURTS. By Joel Benton.
READERS who followed the Zola trials in Paris, and who know nothing of law and law courts, except as they are illus trated in English and American history, met with an unaccountable mental shock, so great is the difference between AngloSaxon judicialmethods and those in France. In a book not long ago published in Paris, and translated by Gerald P. Moriarty of Balliol College, Oxford, with some addi tions by this translator, the numerous and fundamental differences between the systems of law on the opposite sides of the English channel, are shown in detail. In the first place the English law courts trace an un broken descent from Henry the Second, and they embody antique traditions with new features, " legal fiction, equity and legisla tion," in varying parts; while the courts of France are based on the legislation of the Constituent Assembly of 1791 . Nothing back of that counts. The French revolu tionary reformers swept centuries of custom and tradition away, in setting up their courts. In England the law courts and the executive side of the government are com pletely separate. In France no action "civil or criminal " can take place without being directly supervised by a state official. The government representative in France, who sits in court, is a public prosecutor in criminal cases; in civil cases he takes sides, or not as he chooses. The Tribunal of Peace, somewhat like our justice of the peace courts, exists in every one of the thirty-six thousand communes in France .— and a commune corresponds to our township. The juge de paix has two deputies to take his place, when his absence or illness make a substitute necessary. His jurisdiction cov ers petty cases. " He can impose, without appeal, a fine of fifteen francs or a sentence
of imprisonment for five days." Any judg ment beyond doing this is subject to ap peal. In civil matters he is mainly an arbi trator, " bound by law to try and effect in a friendly way, and without charging any fee, a reconciliation between all persons wishing to go to law. With exceptions — one of which is on appeal granted by a higher au thority — no civil suit plaintiff can issue a writ, until he shows that Hut juge de paix "has failed to reconcile him to the defen dant." The next court in ascent is the Tribunal of the First Instance, which entertains both civil and criminal actions. The tribunals are divided into different chambers; in Paris there are eleven. The tribunals vary in size. The one in Paris contains seventy-four judges, as well as fifteen suppliants. These last are deputy, or substitute judges. As a correctional court, the tribunal hears for a finality, appeals from the courts below it. It tries in the first instance misdemeanors by the penal code; but in these cases there is appeal. Certain members of this court are made juges d 'instruction, or examining magistrates. They can dismiss, if they think there is no ground for issue, any accused person. Where there is belief of a felony, they pass the accused person to a chamber of indictments, which draws up the proper charge which takes him to the court of assize. The examining magistrate questions the accused in private. He can put him in soli tary confinement times without limit, and there is no limit to the period of examina tion. This power is so subject to abuse that there " are said to be cases of prisoners wrongfully confessing to a charge in order to put an end to the worrying torture of private examination." In civil cases the
