Paris alone, there are sixty-one judges to hear and decide cases, twenty-two who ex amine, and thirty-one whose duty it is to de mand conviction or acquittal in the name of the law. The number for all France, the capital and Algeria included, is three hun dred and seventy-five presiding justices, sixtyfive vice-presidents, four hundred and eleven examining judges, and six hundred and eightyseven ordinary judges. The magistrature dtbout numbers three hundred and seventyfive public prosecutors and two hundred and ninety-eight assistants. The twenty-six appeal courts of France and the court at Algiers give employment to twenty-seven chief justices, sixty-three presiding judges, or vice-presidents, twentyseven public prosecutors, sixty-one attorneysgeneral, sixty assistants, and four hundred and fifty counsellors. Above the courts of appeal, the name of which indicates their attributions, there is the Court of Cassation, with its high and somewhat hazy duties of interpreter of the laws., This court sits at Paris, on the perilous borders of politics. The appeal courts and the Court of Cassa tion form what is termed the haute magis trature. Criminal cases are not dealt with in France by a distinct body of judges, as in some other countries. The question of guilt or inno cence is submitted to a jury, the same as in the United States and England. The presid ing judge at assizes is always a counsellor of the appeal court of the district; he is accom panied by two assessors, who are also coun sellors if the assizes are held in the town where the appeal court sits, but who can be chosen from among the judges of first in stance if they are held in some other place. The names of the judges are drawn by lot from lists compiled beforehand by the public prosecutor and the chief justice. Although the rights of the accused are not as well pro
tected as they are in the United States and in England, they are nevertheless well enough protected to leave scope for the exercise of leniency when deserved. In fact, certain juries have carried indulgence to such a point as to arouse public opinion. Most of the cases known as crimes passionnels — that is to say, crimes arising -from that one of the passions which most deeply stirs man's heart once it springs up therein — usually result in an acquittal, to the distress of the rigidly virtuous judge, but to the delight of many Frenchmen. Moreover, legislation has con siderably relaxed the precautions formerly taken to ensure the conviction of the guilty. The judge's charge, for example, which was often a veritable speech for the prosecution, instead of being, as the law intended, an im partial review of the case, for and against, has been abolished, and its pernicious effect is no longer felt. The cause of justice has, beyond doubt, gained thereby. It is difficult to see why three judges should be required for passing sentence after the jury has given a verdict. The law, by its numerous and subtle distinctions, has made this duty very simple. I do not believe it possible that a good judge can seriously err in preforming this task, and it would seem, therefore, that the two assessors have been given him in order to guard against slips and oversights. Criminal procedure is so -full of pitfalls that perhaps three heads are not too many for this purpose. The Court of Cassa tion is always on the lookout, and does not always require a good reason for quashing a sentence regularly passed and based on solid ground. The Court of Cassation has only a limited staff. There is a chief justice and a public prosecutor, who are on an equal footing, three presiding judges, forty-five counsellors, and six attorneys-general. All of them receive higher salaries than the judges of other courts.
