The Portland gazette. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1818-1824, 1821-03-01

purpose ] like 10 see something like consis-
teucy.
1t is not good policy, sir, to commit to your
Supreme Court the LILLE vexatous suits, that
are continually occurring between man d man
and mixing them with the great questions Of
life and property in which the state as well as
individuals are concerned, suppose merchant
engaged IN large commercial enterprise should
while he hac vessels lying al The wharf pre-
pairing tor sea, be engaged IN wedding ms
garden or grayelling ms walks, would you call
This economy or good poIIcyf SImilar viii
be the situation OF your courts II you ADOPT
this report.
The amendment proposed by the Senate
remedies the abuses OF the present courts. Mr.
). then stated The prominent features Oh The
amendment, and observed that ii Tins business
was all done IN the Supreme Couu new } I'd 5es
must he appointed, aud II so, good Polcy dc
taled that they should be IN separate Courts,
which should form an intermediate system.
The Common Pleas, said Mr.. 5. seems to
DE very odious to some members OF The House,
both in name and substance, and they perhaps
viii be ready 10 celebrate lis destruction by
bon fires and burn it in efigy, as our fathers
Inc Pilgrims used 10, the Pope and the Devil
lie hoped The bill from the Senate, which he
considered remedy tor the evils OF The pres
ent system and subject to no risks wouid be
adopted by the House.
MIR. AmEs. l understand sir, the question
before the committee IN TACT, though not m
orm 10 be non concurrence OF The House IN
he amendment vi the Senate. and an adher-
ence to the bill as passed IN this House 10 be
engrossed. The subject was discussed parlic-
uarly on former occasion, but considering
the variety OF opinion, both IN and out OF doors;
and that / was Under the necessity OF differing
IN opinion from many gentlemen IN the House
and IN the community, tor whom have the
highest respect-l have carefully examined
my own motives and opinions, TO see ii had
any particular interest to lead me 10 the con-
cusion adopted. | would not question any
mans motives. tor the sentiments he may
express on tins bill, but l have right to
question nv own motives, whether may not
have found something in the bill itself, or the
effect il night have upon me, TO have lnhuen-
ced my opinions, and made me Differ from men
for whom have such high respect. But, sir,
find, that my small business will be made
still smaller by the operation OF this bill, SO
that on that score, can have no Interest,"
Again have enquired whether II has not such
bearing Oh the community, that may re
ceye some benefit or some gratihcation TO my
prejudices but find none II IS stated 10
you that il will Cypress the Supreme Court,
but declare TO you, sir, that have no feel-
Ings which do not serve to attach me TO the
Supreme Court the Judges are my personal
friends, and they will tell you 50, and shall
oppose any thing which may Cypress them
shall aid those gentlemen all in my power.
But possibly may be seeking popular favor;
gentlemen have said II IS not the wish OF lhe
people that the bill which | advocate should
pass, where then is the popular breath, that !
attempt to snuff have then no interest there,
and finding myself uniDterested by personal
considerations, my convictions prevail over
me.
But what are the reasons in support OF this
bill They were assigned al the time Of lis
passage and have not yet been rebutted one
argument in favor Of the passage OF the bill,
was that it abolished the Circuit Court OF
Common Pleas, and transferred its powers to
the Supreme Court and it was on account OF
the great delay Of justice and NAL practice IN
those Courts. | do not mean to say any thing
against any individual who ever sat upon that
bench; for many of them have high regard,
but Parsons with all his learning aud correct
practise, could not make that Court satistacto-
nv, the system is unsoand, il is rotten al the
core,
Another argument is the infinite expence
that results from the Intermediate system
and how shall the business be done, to save
this expence TO the people can The Supreme
Court do il ? say It can, and MAINTAIN thai
no three men can be found, who can do the
business better. When we were connected
with Massachusetts,, the Supreme Court never
spent over Is weeks in this District IN the
Nisi Prius terms, and for law, the Court never
was holden over weeks, which was holden
by three Judges, and being multiplied by 3
gives l5 weeks for each Judge, Tor the law
terms, which added to the Is, makes in the
whole % weeks for one Judge IN this Staie--I
say then that our Supreme Court can do the
business, it they cannot, they cannot do SO
much as the Judges of Massachusetts,. The
House believed The Supreme Court could do
the business, as weH as the Common Pleas, as
erpedttiousl4 and with as much dignity too,
and am the last man who would disturb the
dignity of that Court, or their influence, they
should breath into their decisions the spirit Of
the statute book, and they should have, and
will have time to do il.