Show LAW JOURNAL CENSURES THE UTAH AH SUPREME COURT AND DEFENDS JUDGE BROWN In commenting upon the recent action acton or of the supreme court of Utah in hading handing I down a decIsion in which one section of the juvenile court law wa was declared to be unconstitutional and Judge Brown ot of the juvenile cour Court severely the Cen Law Journal has the following to sQ say We e have an opinion upon the const or of the juvenile court law handed down by the supreme court of Utah The most striking part of the opinion Is th the of knowledge dis displayed displayed played therein of the nature and source or of the juvenile court law The court seems to have recognized no datum posts and to have gotten lost In a wl wil derI Ss and nf after r many days and deviou ways was found a wa way out out The hc opinion leaves out of oC consideration entirely the grounds upon which the constitutionality of the law is 15 rested as shown by the Ions or of other court courts I It seems as though acer after an all that ha has been said b by other court l a really good opinion could now bl be written by br any supreme court upon this sUbject One of the m most st comprehensive opInIons opinIons Ions we have met with Is that of oC Judge McEwan sitting as chancelor chancellor in the clr c cult lt c court urt of Cook cOurty Illinois which may lie be found In 6 61 Cent L J 2 Ar tide S section Rev St St of Utah pro provides vides rides The district court shall have thai Inal jurisdiction In maters matters civi and criminal not excepted In this and prohibited b by law etc Sec provides In equity case cases the appeal may maybe maybe be upon queston of both law and fat fatS fact S Sec 7 article I provides that that no person be deprived of life liberty or prop property crt erty without hue due process of law Equity Should Govern The above shows that the thc constitution of Utah recognizes equity as fun fully as It does common law powers in It Its du due pro process process cess or of law I It follows then when the legislature Provided for juvenile courts In Utah I it w was s providing for a court whIch would be be governed by the thc rule rules of equity equit There Thore can b be no escape from this because I it Is so every everywhere where On page volume 2 Stor Storys s Equity EqUit Jurisprudence Thirteenth Editon Edition he says We shan shall next proceed to tle tiLe consideration of another porton portion of the thep p exclusive jurisdiction or of courts of equity part partly arising from tho peculiar relation and personal character of the partes parties who are F Of If from the mixture of lc private vate trusts ofa of U large and interesting nature th t l te the general care and superintendence of Infants cd id vest In the the crown when have haye no other guardian th the queston questIon by whom and 11 iii what manner the prerogative should be exercised should not ot seem open to much controversy Partaking as a I it does docs more more of oC the nature of a judicial ad administration ministration of rights and dutts duties In fore foro than of strict t exclusive au authority II It would naturally follow fonow ea Ca ra tone that I it should be exercised in a acourt i court of chancery as a branch of th the general jurisdiction originally confided to toI toft I ft On page 66 Id section 13 1311 the au author author thor also says that the jurisdictIon or of I a acourt court of equity extends to the carE care of the person peron or of the infant so far as It mi may maybe be necessary fot for his protection and edu educatIon catIon and to the cre care ot of the the property caton of the infant for It Its due management and preservation and proper application his I It Is upon the for former former mer for ground principally that Is to sa say of the de due protection and education of the infant that the court interferes wih with the ordinary right rights of parents or guar guardians guardiana diana byk nature or in regard to the custody by and care of the children For In general parents parets are entrust the custody of persons the education or of the children yet this Is done upon the natural presumption that the children n will be properly taken care of and wi will be brought up wih with due edu education cation In literature and morals and re caton and that the they wl will be treated with kindness and But whenever this presumption is removed er for ex example mple Is Is found that a r father ther therIs Is found guilty of gross 1 ill r git cruelty towards his Infant children or that he constant habits or of drunk drunkenness enness and or low and goss gross debauchery or that his domestic associations are such a as would tend to the corruption and contamination of his drone dron in short If the parents of the child or children are such a as to render them unfit persons the author says In every such case the court of chancer chancery wi will In Interfere and deprive them of the custody of oC their children and appoint a suitable person as a guardian to take care caro of them and superIntend their education ducton See note to cae case ex cx rel reI 62 cent cent ered r L J 26 where the ces cases are gath gathered gathered Power of a Chancelor Chancellor So i it is ls shown that the frt first thing to todo todo do is to find out whether the parents of the child chUd or guardians are aro unfit per persons perSons sons to have havo We the cre care and custody of the child or children about which the cour court ma may be concerned Having concluded ed Cd this the Queston question as to how the court may deal wih with the parents who attempt to with the children ren afterwards Is vcr very simple I It Is not necessary to en enter enter ter Into a discussion of the Inherent Power of e courts to punish fC for contempt Courts or of equity ma may act without the intervention of a jur jury The judge of a juvenile court ourt b by jt its very nature Is clothed wih with the or of a All this Js Is fundamental law HereIn comes of cOnstruction which s ems to lUle have been totally totany lackIng it itt th the opinion In question Upon con construction depends our laws are areo o be a curse or a blessing Courts cn can cannot not build in opposition to fundamental law Whatever te the language employed I it must admit of such incidents as pre presumed presumed knowledge of the law that for greater grenter laws the le ser m must st yield be because because cause of oC the public welfare necessity good morals reason anti and convenience Hughes Procedure volume 2 2 page 8 Th There re is e er reason both from pub pub lc lie pol policy C and convenience that In rEspect respect to delinquent children nd the parents who are accountable for their des cies such children should be under the jurisdiction of a court of chancery and I it become necessary In the exer else of this jurisdiction to punish the par parents parents b by depriving them of their liberty the public good is the first concern of the government and there is no infraction ton tion or of the constitution in so deprIving them In the very nature of the jurls juris diction the parents of the delinquent cht chil drOn are brought rought Into the jurisdiction of ofa a court wih with ful chancery powers and If the public good under c circum circumstances stances seems to that tle the par parents should be deprived of their thir liberty such a court may exercise that power without the intervention of a jU Jury See 6 61 Cent r TA J The Tue juvenile court ourt In Utah as a branch of equity al nIfty This seems so plaIn u a proposition of eQuity that It seems amazing that the II i c courts lave have failed to grap grasp Whatever it laws the legIslature made to aId this jur jurisdiction neither the nature of the laws the thc jurisdiction The whole process was one of oC e ul and In the Int or of the statutes the broad brond cO construction of the rules of equity should have been applied Defense of Brown As to the attack by tIle cour court upon JUdge Brown there appears to have been no warrant Judge Brown has almost a national reputation as u a lover of chi dren and lIa has done much for tor the good of boys in many parts of the country countr While there is no doubt that a knowledge dge of the law aids a judge ofa juvenile court ourt yet yeta t ta a supreme knowledge of the law Is hot b by any means sufficient to make a good Judge Soie Some judges learned in the law tire arc absolute failures In juvenile courts and as between a knowledge of boys and their needs and a knowledge of the law the former Is infinitely bete better if wih with tlc the latter there Is not a lull fun quota of the for former former later mer Juvenile court judges are arc born such The rho knowledge of oC the law necessary necessary sary In such a judge may soon be ac acquired acquired BesIdes that there is nothIng to prevent his calling in a district judge either to confer wih with or sit wih with him 01 on the few occasions when he mIght be needed and It is certain that his acts may be reviewed b by a higher cour court courtIn In speaking of this chancery jurisdiction tion in the celebrated case of v ton Duke of Beaufort 2 Russ 2 l Lord El EI Ellon pon lon said t I do o apprehend that notwithstanding standing aU all the doubts that ma may exIst us as to the origin of this jurisdiction It swill m be found absolutely necessary that such a juri jurisdiction should exist subject to correction b by appeal and subject to the most scrupulous and conscientious conviction or of the judge that he he Is to look most strictly Into the merIt merits of every cae case of this kind with the utmost anxiety ety to be right It might not be amiss to enact laws which I would enable the judge of the ju venue court to cal call In the district judge venie to his assistance when he deemed it wise This be a good law whether or not the juvenile court judge happened to be learned in the law |