Note 174 — Chapter VI · Descriptive Geography, Ethnology, and Statistics of Utah Territory.

The Court held, First. That the 9th section of the Organic Act vested all judicial power in the Supreme, District, and Probate Courts, and in Justices of the Peace.

Second. That the only restriction placed upon these courts was as to Justices of the Peace, refusing them jurisdiction to try any case involving the title or boundary to land, or any suit where the claim or demand exceeded one hundred dollars.

Third. That by virtue of that clause of the Organic Act which provides that “the jurisdiction of the several courts therein provided for,” including the Probate Courts, “shall be as limited by law,” that the Legislature had the right to provide by law for the exercise by the Probate Courts of jurisdiction in civil and criminal cases.

Fourth. That as the Organic Act conferred common law and chancery jurisdiction upon the Supreme and District Courts respectively, that this jurisdiction belonged to these courts exclusively, and that the Probate Courts were confined to the jurisdiction conferred by statute, and such jurisdiction might be exercised concurrently with the District Courts to the extent provided by statute.

Fifth. That as the Legislature had passed a law conferring upon the Probate Courts concurrent jurisdiction with the District Courts to hear and determine civil as well as criminal cases within their respective counties, and had provided the manner in which this jurisdiction should be exercised, that the trial, conviction, and sentence of the prisoner were valid and binding in law until reversed by an appellate court.

Although Judge Shaver, one of the best of jurists, tacitly acknowledged the jurisdiction of Probate Courts, Judge Kinney is the first who has dared assert his decision judicially.