In those countries in which Anglo-Saxon institutions prevail, the independence of the judiciary and the importance of its functions are very fully recognized, and under our constitutional system they are peculiarly emphasized. Although the courts have no military force directly at their command, and no treasury from which to appropriate money, nevertheless their decisions in the cases coming before them, although they may involve questions of the greatest importance, not only to individuals but to the public, are almost always acquiesced in and carried out. The judicial department is ultimately dependent on the executive department to enforce its judgments if resisted, and upon the legislative department for the appropriation of the funds necessary to enable it to continue in existence and discharge its functions; but the general respect for law, and the conviction that the rights of the people are better protected by an orderly administration of justice than in any other way, gives to the judiciary a popular support, notwithstanding criticism or dissatisfaction as to the result reached in particular cases, and enables it with confidence to rely upon all the executive and legislative assistance which may be necessary. On the other hand, the total inability of the courts to do more than render judgments, which must be dependent for enforcement, if resisted, on the action of the executive department, and their obligation to apply the law as it exists, subject to any change which the legislative department may see fit to make within constitutional limits if the law as administered is found to be unsatisfactory, constitute an ample safeguard against any revolutionary or tyrannical use by the courts of the independent power vested in them.

The functions of the judicial department are discharged by courts created by law, and courts can only decide cases which are properly brought before them. A case brought before a court is said to be within the jurisdiction of the court if it is one which by law the court is authorized to try, and which, in the particular instance, is so submitted to it that it may be tried. It is often said that, to authorize the determination of a case in a court, the court must have jurisdiction of the subject-matter and of the parties. But by such a statement is simply meant that the case must be one of a class of cases which by law the court has authority to determine; and that the particular case is brought by one having the right to sue in the court, and that the party against whom a decision is asked is served with notice or otherwise brought into court in such way that he is bound to present his defence.

It would be going beyond the proper scope of a treatise on constitutional law to discuss at length and in detail the subject of jurisdiction; it is sufficient to say that, when a case is properly within the jurisdiction of a court to decide, its decision is conclusive on the rights of the parties as to the matter presented, save as it may be subject to review by some higher court, and cannot be questioned by either of the other departments of government. On the other hand, the courts have no power to determine any other questions than those presented to them in controversies between parties; and they cannot, therefore, interfere, except in particular cases in which the rights of individuals are involved, with the discharge of their functions by the other departments. It is true that a decision of a court interpreting the constitution or the law is properly regarded as a precedent, which ought to be followed by the other departments, as well as by other courts of the same or an inferior grade in similar cases. But the decision of a court is a precedent of controlling effect only because of the power which the courts may have to decide similar cases in the same way; as to a matter which cannot come before the courts for adjudication, the decision of a court is not binding on the legislative or the executive department, although it may properly be given weight and respect as expressing views which are entitled to the highest possible consideration. (See also above, § 7.)