Today, many of our younger citizens, and probably none of our teenagers, have ever been inside a courtroom where court was conducted by a non-lawyer judge; who couldn't pronounce half the legal terms found in law books, and with no lawyers in the courtroom to advise him on points of law.

At one time, we did had such courts scattered all over rural Breathitt County. They were the magisterial courts, conducted by justices of the peace. In those bygone days, the office closest to the people was the justice of the peace. Aside from having a part in administering the county's fiscal affairs, he was a judge in his own district, with jurisdiction over misdemeanor offenses, and the power to issue warrants, which were served by the district's constable. He usually held court at his home, whenever the need arose.

Though many of our past justices of the peace were functional illiterates by today's standards, they more than made up for their lack of education with plenty of old-fashioned wisdom and horse sense. Filed in the Breathitt County Court Clerk's office is an old warrant issued by a justice of the peace more than 70 years ago. The warrant charged a man with stealing a shotgun. Across the back of the old warrant the justice of peace wrote, "I hereby, pint _____ (the name of a man) special bailiff to sarve this warrant."

At that time, the word "pint" was used by the majority of the citizens (meaning "appoint") and "sarve" was used (meaning "serve"). No doubt, the meaning of the two words was clear to everyone in the county at the time, because people used these words more than the two they were supposed to use, in good English.

Most justices of the peace held very few court sessions. They usually acted as mediators in disputes between neighbors. Often the disputes were settled, the neighbors shook hands, and became friends again. Thus, "justice of the peace" was an appropriate title for the office. But if the dispute couldn't be settled by mediation, court was held.

The first magisterial court I ever saw in action was held in a one-room schoolhouse many years ago. The case involved a dispute between two neighboring men over a road right of way. There seemed to be many bitter feelings between the two men. While one man was testifying on the witness stand, the other was calling him a liar. The one testifying then leaped from his seat, and a fistfight ensued in the courtroom. Several men in the audience pulled the two men apart.

The judge said nothing until the men calmed down, then he began to talk calmly with both of them. He claimed kin with both and said he thought as much of one as he did the other. Since they both interrupted court with a fight, the law required that both men be cited for contempt of court. He also told them he would treat both of them alike; whatever he gave one, he would give the other. Then he added, "If I give one of you 30 days in jail, I'll give the other the same thing. But if you two will shake hands and make friends, I'll fine both of you the lowest amount the law will allow."

The threat of a jail term apparently frightened both men. They shook hands and dropped the lawsuit. The justice of peace said, "I now fine each of you one-cent and the cost for contempt of court, but I'll throw the cost away."

Each man opened his pocketbook, pulled a penny from it and handed it to the judge. During the 1970s, Kentucky passed an amendment replacing magisterial courts and county courts with the district court system. Though the state claims such local courts have served their purpose and are no longer needed, many people still disagree. They say the closer the court is to the people the better it serves them, and many people regret that the county magistrates are no longer judges.