THE DECISIONS

OF THE

Supreme Court of the United States

AT

OCTOBER TERM, 1898.

[Authenticated copy of opinion record strictly followed, except as to such reference words and Agures as are inclosed in brackets.]

[1] CAPITAL TRACTION COMPANY, Plff. in

Err.,

v.

CHARLES HOF.

(See S. C. Reporter's ed. 1-46.)

Jurisdiction of this court-trial by jury— trial before justice of the peace and a jury, not a trial by jury within the constitutional provision-when trial by jury in appellate court satisfies constitutional right of trial by jury-re-examination of the facts-enlarging jurisdiction of justices of the peace.

1.

6.

in any court of the United States than according to the rules of common law is not violated by allowing an appeal, for trial by a common-law jury, from the judgment on the verdict of a jury of twelve men in a court of a justice of the peace, as that is not a common-law jury.

The right of trial by jury is not unduly obstructed by enlarging the civil jurisdiction of justices of the peace to $300, and requiring every appellant to give security to pay and satisfy the judgment of the appellate court in order to obtain a trial by a common-law jury on appeal.

[No. 108.]

Argued January 5, 6, 1899. Decided April 11, 1899.

N ERROR to the Court of Appeals of the

This court has jurisdiction of a writ of error to the court of appeals of the District of Columbia, to review its decision as to the validity and effect of the legislation of Con- INDERROR to the Coia to review a judg gress conferring upon justices of the peace in that District jurisdiction in civil actions in ment of that court reversing an order of the which the matter in Cispute exceeds $20 Supreme Court of the District and remandin value, and providing for a trial by jury being the case with directions to quash a writ fore the justice, an appeal to the supreme court of the District, and a trial by jury in the appellate court, at the request of either party.

2. Trial by jury under the Constitution means a trial by a jury of twelve men in the preence and under the superintendence of a judge empowered to instruct them on the law, and to advise them on the facts, and (except on acquittal of a criminal charge) to set aside their verdict, if, in his opinion, it is against the law or the evidence.

3. A trial by a jury of twelve men before a Justice of the peace, having been unknown in England or America before the Declaration of Independence, is not a trial by jury within the meaning of U. S. Const. 7th Amend.

4.

A common-law trial by jury in a court of record upon appeal from a judgment of a

Justice of the peace in a civil action, after

giving bond with surety to prosecute the ap-
peal and to abide the judgment of the appel-
late court, is sufficient to satisfy the consti-
tutional right of trial by jury.

5. The constitutional provision, that no fact
tried by jury shall be otherwise re-examined

of certiorari to a justice of the peace to pre-
vent a civil action to recover damages in the
sum of $300 from being tried by a jury be-
fore him. Affirmed.

and 10 App. D. C. 205.
See same case below, 24 Wash. L. Rep. 646

The facts are stated in the opinion.
Mr. R. Ross Perry for plaintiff in error.
Mr. Alexander Wolf for defendant in
error.

*Mr. Justice Gray delivered the opinion of [2] the court:

On September 8, 1896, the Capital Traction Company, a street-railway corporation in the District of Columbia, presented to the supreme court of the District a petition for a writ of certiorari to a justice of the peace to prevent a civil action to recover damages [3] in the sum of $300 from being tried by a jury before him.

The petition for a writ of certiorari alleged that Charles Hof, on August 17, 1896, caused a summons to be issued by Lewis I.