Alabama state intelligencer., 1831-12-24

1his law may be repealed al any time
 i would be unwilling to vote much less advocate any bill, even if thought it salutary, if it were to exist through countless ages.
 Under the constitution, the Judges who would now be elected to go upon the bench, should the bill before us be adopted would not go out of office in 1853, but would hold their commissions for six years from the time when they should be qualified
 The gentleman from Lawrence has objected 10 this Court because the system which he has propos- ed, would cause the business to decrease; that there would, beyond all doubt, be speedy decision And here then, would be but very few appeals l differ, altogether, from the gentleman and if 1 expected to make my living by the practice ofthe law should unhesltatngly vote against the bill now before US. Ihaye thus endeavored, Mir President briefly, to present my views upon this aIl-important subject. and hope have been ineligible. am persuaded the Court IS necessary to common welfare; that it would secure the faithful and prompt administration of justice, and that the additional cost to the State when contrasted with the benefits which would re suit from 1t, would be most cheeriully contributed by the people. hope the bill will pass.
 l Mir PERRY said, as he had offered his views on this subject when it had been before the Senate at former sessions, he had intended to discuss it at present. but gentlemen seemed disposed to take an extensive view of the question, and he agreed with them that 1t was very proper from the impor- tance ofthe proposed measure, that it should be fully discussed, before it was acted upon, he would make 1 few brief on the subject
 | He should say nothing to what had been ad- vanced by the honorable Presdent-except this: at the last session ofthe Legislature that gentleman was willing to support the bill provided 1t could be so framed as to give to the Judges ofhe Supreme Court d sufficient salary. lfhis views were unchanged, he could not perceive how il was that he was now op- posed to the general policy o the bill but the gen temar might have changed his opinion.
 Mir r. remarked on the plan of the gentleman from Lawrence, of conhning the Judges 10 their Crcuils and the commencement of the different Circuits on tEe same day. It was objectionable on the ground
 that 1t would put 1t out of the power ofpartes having in Court to select their own counsel Law yers would be driven from Courts where they would otherwise practise, and where their services were wanted, by force ofan nconvenient system. hlr r. was opposed to ourexsting system chiefly because an associate Court of all others to be abhored. Although the Judge who decides the case below does not sit in the Supreme Court and decide on the again yet he is associated in the Court with the Judges who do decide upon the case and exercises, it to be feared by far too much in- t1uente. ltwas natural that he should speak of his motives, and the reasons that operated on his mind in giving the decision. And even though such influ- ence were not exercised, the system gave ground to the suspicion ltwas desirable, in regard to the Su- preme Court of State, not only that justice should be done; but that it should be organized as give l general satisfaction.
 l Mir r. supposed the case of two Judges who mad gwen directly opposite decisions in their respective circuits, and the case should be brought up for deter mlnaon in the Supreme Court; was it not to be SUD- | posed that each would endeavor to sustain his own opinonf It was impossible that it should be other wise, from that pride of character, comment to all men under such circumstances.
 | The gentleman from Lawrence had stated that - tigation declining such was not his opinion. 1 He admitted that there fewer returns to the Circuit Courts in his section of the country thanthere were some years ago; and it was not difficult to tell thereason. As it was known that case of any mag nltude was llabe to be taken to the Supreme Court and payment delayed for several years. hence arose the cry for small notes. Gentlemen must have ob- served that this had become common requistion in all advertisements of public sales of late and here | too he could discover the reason why the office of justice Of the peace was much sought after late and why 1t had became a source of profit to many. It is not that litigation is declining, but that suits are | tried before different tribunal.
 In replying to the argument that had been offered in behafoflh bill, drawn from the judiciary of other States, there being seventeen of the States of the Union in which separate Supreme Court abolished, the gentleman from Lawrence had remark ed upon the smallness of the salaries of the Judges stating that some of them only received five hundred dollars. From this fact, the gentleman had contend ed that they could have but little need for Supreme Court, This armument would have but little weight when the smallness of some of the States are cen sidered Take the State of Rhode Island, for n- stance, but little larger than the county of Tuscaloo ga. Five hundred dollars might be sufficient sa lary to decide on such cases as were carried up to the highest judicial tribunal, that had arisen within such narrow limits.
 The gentleman from Lawrance had spoken of many cases being disposed Ofwithout argumentin the Supreme Court. This was true; but it was not be- cause the parties or their counsel did not wish them argued. hwas because the delay so great, that 1t was hopeless prospect to wait until all the causes could be regularly argued in turn. Counsel frequent y waited for weeks together at the Supreme Court in nexpectaon ofan opportunity ofargung their rcases but finally had to submit them without argument- And this was one cause, doubt of the uncertainty of the law; as the principles involved in the cases were not discussed before they decided on. The gentleman had spoken of the cases not being tried in the Supreme Court because they were not ready. The gentleman seemed to labor under some mistake. There was no want of readiness in cases in the Supreme Court, as in the Circuit Court. The only question to be tried was the correctness or in- correctness of the decision of the Inferior Court the points were presented in the record.
 Mir P. said his chief objection to our present sys- tenn was. that our ultimate tribunal was associate Court composed of the men who decided the cases that are to be revised and corrected
 Mir ANDERSON said, us he had voted for the bill when 1t was before the Senate former occasion, and as he should now vote against ii, it due to the Senate and to himself that he should state lis reasons for the change. He could not say that he had found out that he was wrong before nor that he did not believe that the organization of a separate Supreme Court would be a benefit to the community. All he had 10 say was this, he representing people who were opposed to it, and he had promised them that their will should be done and ii must be | done; although he confessed that he pursued the l course he did with reluctance He was as tenacious of hIs own opinion perhaps, as most men; but when he stood here the representative of people whose will on particular subject he kuew, he felt himself bound to conform to their wishes
 MT A. said, that in the of the discussion he