THE COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY. I. BY JOHN C. DOOLAN OF THE LOUISVILLE, KY. BAR. THE State of Kentucky, since its ad mission into the Union on June i, 1792, has had four Constitutions. In each of them is made the usual distribution of the powers of government into three depart ments—legislative, executive and judicial—
 | An image should appear at this position in the text. To use the entire page scan as a placeholder, edit this page and replace "{{missing image}}" with "{{raw image|The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 12.pdf/373}}". Otherwise, if you are able to provide the image then please do so. For guidance, see Wikisource:Image guidelines and Help:Adding images. |  |
and each department is prohibited from en croaching upon the rights or powers of the others. Each Constitution has provided that the supreme judicial power of the commonwealth (except in cases of im peachment) shall be vested in one Supreme Court, " to be styled the Court of Appeals." The general func tions and powers of this court have been the same throughout its existence, but radi cal changes have been made in the manner of selecting its mem bers. A review of these changes will therefore be of inter est in sketching the THOMAS history of the court. The first Constitution, adopted in 1792, by a singular anomaly made the " Court of Appeals " a court of original jurisdiction in certain land suits arising under Virginia land grants. This burdensome jurisdiction was taken away by the second Constitution, adopted in 1799. In other essential respects
the first and second Constitutions of the State, so far as they bear directly on the Court of Appeals, are substantially similar. It was provided in both that the judges should be appointed by the governor by and with the advice and consent of the senate, and they should hold their of fices during life or good behavior. This tenure was, however, subject to the right of removal by im peachment in the usual way, or by the gov ernor upon address by two thirds of the mem bers of each house of the general assembly. While the court itself was established by the Constitution, its Organisation was left to the legislature. The number of judges was not fixed, and so during the life of the second Constitution we find the court com posed sometimes of three and sometimes of four judges. One member of the TODD. court was specially commissioned as chief justice; the others as associate judges. Among the associates for a long time a numerical rank was main tained, but this was finally abolished. This power of the legislature in the or ganization of the court gave rise eventually to grave troubles. As elsewhere detailed,
