Some of the greatest abuses of governing power have been in connection with the appropriation of money. They have been due not so much to dishonesty as to bad organization and loose business methods, both in the executive and legislative branches of government. When the executive branch consists of a large number of more or less independent parts, each trying to make the best showing possible, it is quite to be expected that each will seek to get from the public treasury all the money possible without reference to the needs of other parts or to the resources of the state. When, in addition, there is no central executive authority with power to hold the heads of the various parts responsible for their acts, and no uniform or businesslike system of keeping accounts, either of money expended or of work accomplished, it is easy to see the opportunity for wastefulness and inefficiency.

WASTEFUL METHODS OF MAKING APPROPRIATIONS

On the other hand, the methods of making appropriations in the legislature have been equally conducive to wastefulness.

Appropriation bills pa.s.s through the same legislative machinery as all other bills and are subject to the same dangers. Moreover, they are handled by different committees that act as independently of one another as do the various executive departments. In Illinois, for example, until recently "requests for appropriations were submitted informally by each office, department, or board; and separate bills were prepared by the several departments and inst.i.tutions, and introduced by individual members of the General a.s.sembly," l[Footnote: John A. Fairlie, Budget Methods in Illinois, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, November, 1915; quoted by W. F. Willoughby, in The Movement for Budgetary Reform in the States, p. 45.] then being referred to different committees according to the subjects to which they related. At the session of 1913, 94 separate appropriation acts were pa.s.sed.

THE BUDGET SYSTEM

A number of the states have sought to remedy this defect in government by the adoption of a budget system (see Chapter XIII).

Illinois has perhaps made the complete reform in this matter. We have already seen how that state has reorganized its executive branch of government, which is the first necessary step. In this reorganization there was created a finance department, to which all the administrative departments submit a careful estimate of the money needed for their various lines of work, together with a detailed statement of work done and money spent during the two preceding years. The finance department considers all these statements and estimates in their relation to one another and to the financial resources available for the next two years, and submits to the governor a comprehensive and detailed budget. On the basis of this, a single appropriation bill is prepared by a single committee of the legislature. Public hearings are held, the people are given opportunity to know just what the government has done and intends to do, and the governor and his finance department may be held responsible.

No single change would add so largely to both democracy and efficiency as the introduction of proper budget methods.

[Footnote: Foreword to Public Budgets, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, November, 1915; quoted by W. F. Willoughby, The Movement for Budgetary Reform in the States, p. 2.]

Investigate and report on:

Method of making appropriations in your state.

Movement for a budget system in your state.

Why a budget system tends toward (1) economy, (2) efficiency, (3) democracy.

THE JUDICIAL BRANCH

Questions are continually arising as to the meaning of laws, or as to how they apply in particular cases. To answer these questions the judicial branch of government exists, comprising a system of courts. The courts are sometimes called upon to decide whether a law pa.s.sed by the legislature, or an act of an administrative officer, is in harmony with the const.i.tution, and if not, to declare such law or act invalid. The judicial branch of government is therefore the people's organization to keep the other branches of government within their const.i.tutional powers.

CIVIL AND CRIMINAL CASES

In most cases that come before the courts, however, the law is perfectly clear when once the facts in the case are known. It is therefore the business of the courts also to ascertain the facts.

There are two cla.s.ses of cases that come before the courts, civil cases and criminal cases; and the law that applies to the two cla.s.ses is known as civil law and criminal law. A civil case is one that involves a dispute between individuals, or an injury done by one individual to another. Such would be a dispute over a boundary line between the properties of two individuals, or over the payment of a debt; or a personal injury due to the carelessness of some one, or an injury to property or to health through maintaining a nuisance of some kind. In such cases the court, after ascertaining the facts, merely sees that justice is done, as by the payment of damages to the injured party by the one doing the injury. A criminal case is one in which a person is charged with having violated a law of the community. The injury is one against the community as a whole, and not merely against an individual. It is the community that appears in court against the accused person, and not merely one of his neighbors. In such cases the court first ascertains the guilt or innocence of the accused person; and if he is guilty, imposes a PUNISHMENT upon him, such as a fine, or imprisonment, or even death, according to the nature of the crime.

The judicial branch of government, then, is that part of the governmental organization that seeks to adjust, by peaceful and just means, the inevitable conflicts that arise in community life.

JUSTICES' COURTS

The lowest in the series of state courts are the JUSTICES' COURTS, of which there is at least one in every township. They are presided over by justices of the peace. Only cases of small moment come before justices' courts: civil cases involving very small amounts, and cases of minor infractions of the law punishable by small fines or by short terms in jail. Persons accused of more serious crimes may have a preliminary examination in a justice's court and, if the evidence warrants it, be committed to jail to await the action of the grand jury (see below). Most cases in a justice's court are disposed of by the justice of the peace alone; but a jury trial may be demanded in all criminal cases, and in civil suits "where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars" (Const., Amendments VI, VII).

COUNTY COURTS

More serious cases, civil or criminal, are tried in the COUNTY, or DISTRICT, courts before a judge and a JURY. Cases that have been tried in a justice's court may be APPEALED to the county or district court, where there is sure to be a jury trial, and where the judge is more learned in the law than is a justice of the peace. It is the business of the jury to decide on the facts in the case on the evidence furnished in the trial, and in civil cases to award the amount of damages, if any, to be paid; while the judge sees that the procedure is in accordance with the law, instructs the jury as to the law in the case, and in criminal cases fixes the penalty within the limits permitted by the law.

THE COMMUNITY IN COURT

It was stated above that in criminal cases it is the COMMUNITY that appears against the accused. The community appears in the person of the district attorney, otherwise called the prosecuting attorney, state's attorney, or county solicitor. It is the business of this officer to gather evidence of crimes committed in the community and, in most cases, to submit it to the GRAND JURY, which is a body of citizens carefully chosen to consider such evidence. If the grand jury considers the evidence against the accused sufficient to warrant bringing him to trial, it brings in an INDICTMENT against him. The prosecuting attorney then prosecutes the case for the community against the accused. It is of course his duty to secure exact justice; sometimes, however, he seems interested only in securing the CONVICTION of the accused.

RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED

Our state and national const.i.tutions seek to protect carefully the rights of a person accused of crime. He is a.s.sumed to be innocent until he has been proved otherwise. He is guaranteed a "speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury." He must be "confronted with witnesses against him," and have "compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor," and "a.s.sistance of counsel for his defense" (Const., Amendment VI). He cannot be compelled to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without "due process of law" (Amendment V). "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." (Amendment VIII).

CIRCUIT OR SUPERIOR COURTS

In some states there is another set of courts immediately above the county courts, known as CIRCUIT, DISTRICT, or SUPERIOR, courts. The districts in which these courts have jurisdiction include several counties. The cases courts handled by them are either cases of appeal from the lower courts, or cases of greater importance than those over which the lower courts have jurisdiction.

THE STATE SUPREME COURT

The highest court in the state is the SUPREME COURT, sometimes called the COURT OF APPEALS, or the COURT OF ERRORS. In the supreme court several judges sit together, and there is no jury.

The cases that come before it are for the most part cases of appeal from the lower courts, although there are certain cla.s.ses of cases that come before it in the first instance. The supreme court is the final judge as to whether acts of the legislature are in conformity with the state const.i.tution.

OTHER COURTS

In addition to the courts named above there are sometimes others to deal with special cla.s.ses of cases. In cities there are MUNIc.i.p.aL COURTS and POLICE COURTS, both in the same cla.s.s with justices' courts. There are JUVENILE COURTS to deal with juvenile offenders; PROBATE, or SURROGATE, COURTS to settle the estates of persons who have died; COURTS OF CLAIMS to settle claims against the state; and CHANCERY COURTS, or courts of EQUITY, which administer justice in cases that the ordinary law will not reach.

For example, the LAW will permit a man's property to be taken to satisfy a mortgage; EQUITY requires that the property be sold and the surplus over the amount of the mortgage returned to the owner.

The LAW will grant damages for any injury inflicted; EQUITY will, by an injunction, forbid a repet.i.tion of the injury.

SELECTION OF JUDGES

The judges of the state courts were originally appointed by the governors, or by the legislatures. With the movement toward more democratic forms of government, the states began to introduce provisions in their const.i.tutions for the election of judges by the people, and they are now so chosen in most states, though in a number they are appointed by the governor, and in a few by the legislature. It is highly important that judges should be controlled in their decisions solely by the desire to render justice, and that they should be removed as far as possible from partisan influences. Popular election of judges is most prevalent because it seems to give to the people the most direct control over their courts. On the other hand, it is opposed by many because it makes possible the election of incompetent judges, and because it does not necessarily remove the matter from partisan influences. In three states (California, Oregon and Arizona) the judges are subject to recall by the people.

The terms during which judges hold office also vary greatly among the states. In three states they hold office for life (Ma.s.sachusetts, Rhode Island and New Hampshire). In the other states their terms vary from two to twenty-one years.

It seems to be the opinion of most students that the state courts would be improved if their judges were appointed by the chief executive and should hold office for life, or during good behavior, as is the case in the federal courts.

Investigate and report on:

Civil law and criminal law.

What makes an act a "crime."

Difference between a "crime" and a "misdemeanor."

Justices' courts in your community.

Procedure in a justice's court.

The organization of your county court.

Who is your county (or district) judge.

Procedure in your county court, and how it differs from that in the justice's court.

Organization and work of the grand jury.

How a trial jury is selected.

The citizen's duty to serve on the jury.

Rights of an accused person.