Judgment.

In regard to tenure, method of appointment, and duties of judges in the United States, see JUDICIARY. A judge is debarred from sitting on a case in which he has an interest, nor can he be a witness in a case tried before him. As a matter of fact, a judge is not debarred, save by professional etiquette and tradition, from presiding over a case in which he has been counsel. So long as judge does not overstep his jurisdiction he is not liable, either civilly or criminally, for acts performed in the course of his judicial duties, though those acts be erroneous or corrupt; but in the latter case he may be removed by impeachment.

JUDGE-ADVOCATE, the title of an official attached to military commissions, or courts-martial, whose duties are analogous to those of prosecuting attorneys in civil courts; but whose functions, in relation to military law, are also similar to those of a district attorney, or corporation counsel, in being of an advisory character. The appointment of judge-advocates for special courts rests in the authority which appoints the court, whether that be the president, the secretary of war, or the general of the army. But there is also in the U. S. army a corps of four judge-advocates, with the rank of major, who are under the general direction of the judge-advocate-general, and who can be detailed on courts-martial or military commissions, but are usually stationed at the head-quarters of the military departments, where they act as legal advisers to the department commander, and may be appointed by them to court-martial duty. The official duties of a judge-advocate during a trial by court-martial or military commission, or examination by a court of inquiry, are as follows: preparation of the case for the prosecution, procuring of witnesses, administering the oath, opening the case for the prosecution with the necessary argument, questioning the witnesses, and submitting the case to the court. But besides these duties the judge-advocate has still another-seemingly anomalous in this connection-that of protecting the witness from improper or leading questions, and to that extent also acting as counsel for the accused. In the English military service the duties of the judge-advocate have been so far modified that he does not act as prosecutor, but solely in his advisory capacity in connection with the court, and as the recorder of its proceedings.

JUDGE-ADVOCATE-GENERAL, the supreme judge, under the mutiny act and articles of war, of the proceedings of courts-martial. This officer is also the adviser, in legal matters, of the commander-in-chief and secretary of state for war. Before confirmation the sentences of all courts-martial, with the evidence adduced, are submitted to him; and it is for him to represent to the commander-in-chief any illegality of procedure, or other circumstance rendering it undesirable that the queen should be advised to confirm the court's decision. The judge-advocate-general receives a salary of £2,000, and is a member of the house of commons and of the ministry-changing, of course, with the latter. As it is essential that the judge-advocate-general should have an intimate acquaintance with the military law, as well as with the general law of the land, he is provided with an assistant or deputy, whose office is permanent, and who is selected from among barristers of eminence.

The Deputy-Judge-Advocate is an officer holding a temporary commission as public prosecutor in every court-martial. He must be an officer of intelligence, as it is part of his duty to examine and cross-examine witnesses, to warn the members of the court of any illegality in their proceedings, and generally to fulfill, in the limited area of the court, the functions which belong to the judge-advocate-general in regard to the whole army.

JUDGE-ADVOCATE-GENERAL (ante), in the U. S. military service, the chief of the bureau of military justice at Washington, with the rank of brig.gen. To him the proceedings of all courts-martial, courts of inquiry, and military commissions are forwarded for revision and record. In England the judge-advocate-general is the final legal authority for the army, and the adviser of the crown in cases where any action of the sovereign is required. His power is supreme as to reviewing the proceedings of courts-martial, etc.

JUDGES. BOOK OF (Heb. Shoftim), a canonical book of the Old Testament, recording the achievements of those heroes who, at different periods in the early history of the Hebrews, before the consolidation of the government under a monarchy, from Joshua to Samuel, arose to deliver their countrymen from the oppressions of neighboring nations, but only three of whom, Deborah, Eli, and Samuel, were judges in our sense of the word. The contents of the book have given rise to much criticism. It cannot be said to be a history, properly speaking. The events recorded in it do not follow each other chronologically, nor is there any other order to be perceived in their arrangement. It is rather a collection of detached historical traditions from the time of the Hebrew republic-probably redacted in the commencement of the reign of David-from ancient poems and popular sagas. It exhibits (whether with a royalistic tendency, as has been supposed by some, or in order to point the moral that however deeply sunk a peopleemphatically the people-might be in slavery or idolatry, or both, God would always send them a deliverer from either at the right time) the lawless and ungodly state of Israel during the greater part of this period, and the evil consequences their intimate connection with the idolatrous nations around them brought upon them. The book naturally falls into two portions-the first up to chapter xvi., containing the heroic deeds

Judgment.

of the single "judges"; the second, from chapter xvii., the two accounts of the idol of Micah, and of the crime of Benjamin. The space of time over which the book extends has of old been hotly contested: that it comprises no less than 300 years (cf. xi. 26) is, however, almost the only point on which we can feel certain, since there is no doubt that many of the events recorded in the book did not follow upon one another, but fell in the same period, a circumstance which chronologers generally have failed to take into account. The book itself differs considerably from the other historical books of the Bible by its simplicity and originality. That most of the heroic adventures related contain-sometimes, perhaps, under a highly poetical guise-true historical facts, has been doubted by but a very small number of critics. Ancient traditions make Samuel the author, or rather redactor, of the book, and there is certainly little to be said against, and much for, this supposition. Compare Ewald, Wette, Rosenmüller, Studer, Keil, etc. See JEWS.

JUDGE'S CHAMBERS means the place where a single common-law judge sits, near Chancery lane, London, in an informal manner, to hear attorneys make applications of an unimportant nature arising out of actions pending in court. If the judge refuse, or decide wrongly, there is an appeal to the court of which he is a judge. In general, a judge sits at chambers all the year round, to dispose of these applications, which are chiefly matters of form, but of urgency.

JUDGES OF ISRAEL, a name given to those who at intervals directed the affairs of the Israelites during the four and a half centuries which elapsed from the death of Joshua to the reign of Saul. Their names were Othoniel, Ehud, Shamgar, Deborah, Barak, Gideon, Abimelech, Tola, Jair, Jephthah, Ibzan, Elon, Abdon, Samson, Eli, Samuel. They were called shophetim, from a word denoting both to judge in the usual sense, and to rule or govern, a name appropriate because judging and ruling are intimately connected in the east. They were then not merely those who determined liti gated questions, but persous appointed to perform various duties, which are to be ascertained from the history. It is common to consider their chief function as that of delivering Israel from foreign oppression. But all did not thus begin their career. Eli and Samuel were not military men. Deborah judged Israel before she went to war against Jabin; and whether Jair, Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon had a military command is unknown. Moreover, the nation in general had much more prosperity than adversity in the time of the judges, the whole period of foreign oppression being only 111 yearsless than a fourth part of their dominion. It is true that many of these judges arose during the time of foreign oppression, and to military exploits was, often due their appointment as judges; but, in general, the appointment depended on the exigencies of the times, requiring gifts or influence adequate for deciding questions between tribe and tribe, administering public affairs, and acting as the head of the people in their intercourse with their neighbors and oppressors. The judges then were faithful men who acted for the most part as agents of the divine will, regents of the invisible king of the chosen people. They were," says Jahn, not merely the deliverers of the state from a foreign yoke, but destroyers of idolatry, foes of pagan vices, promoters of the knowledge of God, of religion and of morality; restorers of theocracy in the minds of the Hebrews, and powerful instruments of divine providence in the promotion of the great design of preserving the Hebrew constitution, and by that means of rescuing the true religion from destruction." In nearly every case recorded the judges were appointed by the free choice of the people. The only cases of direct divine appointment are those of Gideon and Samson. The office was for life, but not hereditary, and the judge had no power to appoint a successor. Their authority was limited by the Hebrew law, and in doubtful cases they were required to consult the divine king through the priest. In great emergencies they convened a general assembly of the rulers, over which they presided, and in which they exerted a great influence. They could not levy taxes or appoint officers. Their authority was over only those tribes that elected or acknowledged them. They received no income, bore no external marks of dignity, were simple in their style of life, free from avarice, patriotic. Regarding themselves as the officers of God they in most instances strove to bring their countrymen to acknowledge his authority 'as that of their invisible king.

JUDGMENT is, in English law, the term usually applied to the final determination of a common-law court in an action, and when the litigation is at an end. In the courts of equity the more usual corresponding term is a decree or order, and in criminal and admiralty courts a sentence. All judgments of the superior courts are, as a general rule, capable of being appealed against (see APPEAL). When a judgment is not appealed against within a certain time allowed for the purpose, then it is final, and binding on the parties. If the judgment is registered it will have the effect of preventing the judg ment debtor from selling or alienating his lands, but in general has no such effect on his goods and chattels or personal estate, except money invested in government stock. In order to make a judgment effectual in an action of debt, if the debtor refuses to pay, a further process is necessary on the part of the creditor, called execution (q.v.) In Scotland judgment is usually called a decree (q.v.), and judgment by default is called a decree in absence.

U. K. VIII-25

Judicial.

JUDGMENT (ante), a term expressing not only the decision or conclusion of a court in the matter of a trial at law, but also, in certain instances, conveying therewith the order thereupon, as in cases where it awards damages upon the verdict of a jury, or in the instance of what is known as a judgment debtor. Judgment by default is rendered in case of the non-appearance of the defendant in court to plead his cause, either personally or by counsel; and in such cases execution is issued for recovery of damages, or, if the suit be for debt, for the amount of indebtedness with costs, without further notice to the one adjudicated against. Confession of judgment is made on the withdrawal of the defendant's plea, when judgment is entered for the plaintiff; of nolle prosequi, when the plaintiff, after appearance in court, retires from the prosecution; judgment of non suit (from non sequitur, it does not follow) is given when the plaintiff fails to appear; judgment in error may either affirm a previous judgment, recall it on account of an error in fact, or reverse it because of an error in law; and interlocutory judgments are given during the progress of an action without concluding it, as in declaring the right of the plaintiff, without awarding damages, or judgment for the plaintiff on a plea of abatement, when it decides that the cause must proceed, and requires the defendant to improve his plea. A final judgment is one which ends the action, as a judgment for the defendant at any time, or for the plaintiff after verdict. But a judgment of non suit does not bar the plaintiff from beginning another suit upon the same cause of action.

JUDGMENT. This familiar word of every-day discourse has a technical meaning in jogic, to which corresponds its acceptation as the name of a faculty of the mind. A "judgment," in logic, is an affirmation of some kind or other, as, "snow is white," "man is mortal." The contrast to it is a mere notion, as white, mountain, mortality. In a judgment, two notions must always enter, but this is not the whole; there must be some declaration coupling the two together, a function performed in all cases by a verb. A complete meaning, as expressed a grammatical sentence, is a judgment. Other designations for the same thing are, proposition, assertion, prediction.

The intellectual faculty called judgment has reference to the logical force of the word, and means the power of forming judgments, and by implication, the further power of determining them to be true or false. This last function is perhaps what is most prominently implied in the faculty, as commonly understood.

The intellectual power of judging, when probed to its deepest foundations in the mind, resolves itself into one of two things-the discrimination of difference, or the perception of agreement in the midst of difference (see INTELLECT). A judge in a court of law finds that a case comes under, or does not come under, a certain statute; which finding constitutes his decision. A scientific man decides a theory to be true by a certain extent of coincidence with observed fact. An artist approves or disapproves a work of art by its agreeing or disagreeing with his standard, or those previous productions that have settled his conception of excellence in that species.

JUDGMENT (in theology). The doctrine of a judgment after death has always been associated with the belief in man's immortality, and is maintained as a doctrine of natural religion on the ground of that responsibility of which conscience always more or less distinctly testifies, and of the evident absence of a due proportion of rewards and punishments to human actions in this life. This doctrine, however, as a doctrine of the Christian religion, contains many things of which there is no evidence apart from revelation. Thus, we are told of a day or time of judgment, when, in great solemnity, and in presence of an assembled universe, the judgment shall be pronounced; also, that the Lord Jesus Christ is to appear in glory as judge. As a doctrine of revelation the doctrine of a final judgment is also brought into close connection with that of the resurrection (q.v.) of the dead.

JUDGMENT, FINAL (JUDGMENT, ante), a point on which various theories have been held. One is that of the common school of rationalists denying a general judgment or a final judicial period, and asserting that men in this life are under a moral government, whereby, in the future world, rewards will come to the good and punishments to the wicked. Another view is that the last judgment is a process now in progress, and even continuous through all history; the history of the world being a continuous manifestation of God is therein necessarily a continuous judging of the world. The Messianic period being in the Old Testament spoken of as the last day," the "last time," the "end of days," the " end of the world," the Jews believed that at the coming of the Messiah the heathen would be punished, and the chosen people exalted. The view of the pre-millenarians is, that to judge is to reign; and that the last judgment will begin when the personal reign of Christ upon earth begins. Another theory is that the day of judgment is a protracted future dispensation, commencing with the second advent of Christ, and continuing through the thousand years of his personal reign upon earth. The theory of Swedenborg is that the spiritual history of mankind is divided into dispensations of divine truth, i.e., into a succession of churches, and that a final judgment takes place in the spiritual world at the close of each dispensation. According to him there have been several "final" judgments; first, at the flood, to close the Adamic or antediluvian dispensation; second, at the Red sea and through the ten plagues, to close the Noatic dispensation; third, at the coming of our Lord, to close the Mosaic dispensation; fourth, at the time of the reformation, or a little after, in 1759, to close the dispensation of the

first Christian church. The doctrine held in common by Protestants, Romanists, and the Greek church is that the final judgment is an event at the end of the world, when the eternal state of men and angels, good and bad, will be determined and publicly manifested; that the rule will be the light enjoyed, either from nature and conscience or from these with the law and gospel contained in the Scriptures; that the ground or matter of judgment will be, not professions, or relations, or reputation, but the deeds done in the body," and these deeds not as external, but as man's vital, spiritual actsthe secrets of the heart," in other words, real character; that the time will be at the second coming of Christ, and at the general resurrection; that the place (as some think) will be in the air, because the judge will come in the clouds of heaven, when the living saints will be changed, the dead saints raised, and both caught up to meet the Lord in the air; or (as others think) the place will be the new earth to which the glorified will descend with Christ. Holy Scripture, while plainly and repeatedly announcing the final judgment and establishing the principles of its process, seems to be silent on the details of time, place, and circumstances-revealing only that it will be the world's great natural, historical, and moral consummation under the ultimate manifestation of Christ in his divine humanity, and accompanying the resurrection of the dead.

JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE PRIVY-COUNCIL, those members of the privycouncil who sit as a court of justice in the hearing of appeals. See PRIVY-COUNCIL.

JUDICIAL DECLARATION, in Scotch law, means a declaration made by one of the parties to a suit, and who has been specially ordered by the court to be examined on a particular point. It is not a statement made on oath. In England the phrase is seldom used, though the same result is obtained by what are called admissions of the parties.

JUDICIAL FACTOR, in Scotch law, is a person appointed by the court of session, on special application, as a guardian to protect the interests of minors, absent parties, and lunatics. In Eugland and Ireland the corresponding officers are called receivers or trustees, according to circumstances.

JUDICIAL RATIFICATION, in Scotch law, means the declaration made by a married woman in the absence of her husband, before a justice of the peace, to the effect that a disposition or deed of alienation of her heritable property has been made without coercion or fear on the part of her husband, and voluntarily on her part. A notary and two witnesses must also be present, and the former indorses on the deed a memorandum of the ratification. The object is to remove objections which might otherwise be made to the validity of the deed. In England a corresponding process is called an acknowledgment of a deed by a married woman.

JUDICIAL REMIT, in Scotch law, is a reference by a court or judge of a canse, or part of a cause, to the decision of an arbiter or nominee, such as an engineer or accountant. The matter referred is generally some technical matter in which the referee is specially skilled. In England the corresponding phrase is a reference to an arbitrator or expert to report.

JUDICIAL SEPARATION, in English law, is the separation of two married persons by order of the court of divorce. Married persons may, if they please, mutually agree to live separate, and they may enter into a deed of separation for that purpose, which to some extent is recognized as valid by courts of equity. This is called voluntary separation. But, in the eye of the law, two married persons living apart are still married, and retain the status of married persons, and must sue and be sued in all respects the same as if they were still cohabiting. And a deed of separation is always revocable by the parties, though to some extent binding on each, if the other do not consent to renew the cohabitation. But when the parties have not mutually consented to separate, one of them can compel a judicial separation for certain grounds of misconduct. Thus, either party may apply on the ground of adultery or cruelty, or desertion without case for two years and upwards. The kind of cruelty which has been held a ground of judicial separation is difficult of definition.

The consequences of a judicial separation are as follow: The parties, not being divorced, cannot marry again; but there is no longer the duty of cohabiting. Part of the decree may consist of an award of a certain income to the wife after separation, and the court may make orders as to the custody and maintenance of the children. But, irrespective of this, the wife becomes, to all intents and purposes as regards her future property, in the same position as if she were unmarried. On the other hand, the husband is no longer responsible for maintaining his wife, except so far as he may have been ordered to pay her alimony, and he is not liable for her future debts. In 1857 the law on this head was materially improved, and a new divorce court established, which, since the judicature act of 1873, falls within the probate, divorce, and admiralty division of the high court of justice.

In Scotland the law has also been recently changed, and now nearly coincides with the English law in many respects, this improvement being made by the conjugal rights' act, 24 and 25 Vict. c. 86. By that act, whenever a decree of separation a mensa et thoro is obtained at the instance of the wife, all property which she may acquire, or which may devolve upon her, is held entirely separate from and independent of her husband; she

can bequeath it by will as if he were dead; she can also enter into contracts, and sue and be sued in her own name; and the husband is no longer liable for necessaries or her debts, except so far as he is bound by the decree of separation to pay to her aliment. As regards the grounds of judicial separation in Scotland, they are nearly the same, being described by Mr. Bell in his Principles thus: whenever life is endangered, or there is fair and reasonable ground of apprehension of personal violence, or there is continued annoyance, wearing out and exhausting the party, or there are adulterous practices. It will, however, be found that the grounds of divorce are more ample in Scotland than in England. See MARRIAGE.

JUDICIARY IN THE UNITED STATES. In other countries the judicial is more or less complicated with the legislative function; but in the United States the three departments of government, legislative, executive, and judicial, are scrupulously separated from each other. The house of lords, unlike the American senate, was until recently both a legislative and judicial body, and even now some of its members are judges. The lord chancellor, the highest judicial officer of the kingdom, exercises various powers of a political rather than a judicial character; and the master of the rolls is eligible to a seat in parliament. This investiture of the same person with both judicial and legislative functions has its roots in early Saxon and Norman practices, not yet wholly outgrown. Judges of United States courts can neither serve in congress, fill the presidential chair, nor exercise any political power except that of individual

voters.

The judicial power of the United States is vested by the constitution in a supreme court and such inferior courts as congress may from time to time establish. The supreme court consists of a chief-justice and nine associate justices, appointed by the president with the consent of the senate, holding office during good behavior, and receiving for their services a compensation which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office. They have the privilege (if they have been commissioned not less than 10 years) of resigning at the age of 70, and drawing their salaries through life. "The judicial power shall extend to all cases in law and equity arising under this constitution, the faws of the United States, or treaties made or which shall be made under their authority; to all cases affecting ambassadors, or other public ministers, and consuls; to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction; to controversies to which the United States shall be a party; to controversies between two or more states; between a state and a citizen of another state; between citizens of different states; between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states; and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens, or subjects. In all cases affecting ambassadors or other public ministers, and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the supreme court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned the supreme court shall have appellate jurisdiction both as to law and as to fact, with such exceptions and under such regulations as congress shall make," (U. S. Constitution, art. 3, secs. 1, 2.) The supreme court has appellate jurisdiction over cases from the circuit courts where the matter in controversy has a value of over $1000. By the act of 1789, c. 20, sec. 9, the United States is divided into judicial districts, and in each district a district court is established consisting of one judge resident in the district. These courts have both civil and criminal jurisdiction. In their civil jurisdiction they have the powers of a court of admiralty, and also certain extraordinary powers conferred by statute. Their jurisdiction extends over cases of salvage, seizures, prize causes, torts committed on the high seas or within ebb and flow of tide, and maritime contracts. By an act of congress passed in 1845, the district courts were given jurisdiction over contracts and torts in regard to vessels plying between ports in different states on the lakes. The extraordinary jurisdiction of the district courts extends over captures made within the waters of the United States; seizures under the U. S. laws of importi navigation, or trade; suits brought by or against a consul or vice-consul; suits brought by an alien for a tort in violation of laws or treaties of the United States, and over cases in bankruptcy. The criminal jurisdiction of the district courts is concurrent with that of the circuit courts over non-capital offenses against the United States. These districts compose ten circuits, for each of which a circuit court is established, consisting of one of the justices of the supreme court and a circuit judge or a district judge. The circuit courts have original jurisdiction in civil suits "at common law or in equity, where the matter in dis pute exceeds in value $500, exclusive of costs, and the United States are plaintiffs or petitioners, or an alien is a party, or the suit is between a citizen of the state where the suit is brought and a citizen of another state." They have original jurisdiction in cases arising from violation of the copyright or patent laws. The circuit courts have appellate jurisdiction by writs of error to the district courts or appeals from the latter. Other courts of the United States are the territorial courts established in each territory, and consisting of a chief-justice and two associate justices holding office for four years; and the court of claims, consisting of a chief-justice and four associates, with jurisdiction to pass upon all claims resting upon an act of congress, or a department rule, or contract with the United States.

In the several states of the United States the judiciary is either appointed by the executive, or, more commonly, elected by the legislature or directly by the people.