Alabama state intelligencer., 1831-12-22


 consideration of the Court; 1 as a conse-
 quence, they may dispose of [reater num- ' Der ot cases than at the precdg term.
 It has been said, ,that at Janty term 1929, [, the Court was in session onliine days, but e the Senate will remember, tt at this term is articles of impeachment had cen preferred ,- against three of the Judges, q the remain Q ing Judges could not with bprcty, have n proceeded with the business,h consequence
 of the responsibility which lould have de- : volved dupon them, inasmuch 3f in any cause s they should not have been unimous or in e the event cause had been rought before : them from the circuit held byne of the four r who were unimpeached, the dcision in either instance would have been madby minority I or the Court. This then, waan insupcrabe barrier, over which they coul have had no control. Ii they had neverthless, have held the Court, they would have encountered a most fearful responsibility; and perhaps,
 "ould nave received the exeaations of the
 community.
 e Since 1929, the business brought before the
 supreme Court has materially increased;
 ana surely, if any thing could lave urged the judges to redoubled exertion oA their part, it would be the fear of an impeachment for their want ct excrtion. But, sir. lam well satis- ned that the Judges have accomplished all mat could have been reasonably expected. l nave witnessed their exertions. and we have seen they are utterly unable to keep pace "ith the business. The fault then, must most uhquestionably be attributed to the de rect oi the system, and not to the Judges.
 tnefG tpa 'flt}% $50 6rases'upinl',he docket, and the document from which 1 have read on a previous day, showing the progress which the Judges have made from time to time, would ask when this prodigious accumulation of busi- ness will be disposed off It cannot be done; for at every term of the Court, a considera- ble number of new cases will be brought up from the circuits, thus adding to their number. What then, shall we do> How shall we answer to the demands of public justice? How shall we allay the discontent of sutorse l answer, the only remedy which will prove effectual and salutary, is the crea- ation of the Supreme Court, as contemplated by the bill before us; for the business, whe- ther from want of industry, or whatever cause it may be, cannot now be accomplished without a resort to the remedy proposed, which is the only means in our power.
 There are cases now on the Supreme Court docket which were there in 1928, period of three years and half. Sir is this justice' Is this that prompt administration VI JH'tiNN eiiN l'eOlIlS iSiuliC, dnu WHICH they have right 10 demand from us, who have been delegated by them to legislate for their benefit? No, sir, it is the most wanton injustice. What then, in the name of common sense, shall we do, unless we pass the bill before us, and thus give them speedy relief?
 feel confident, that the Judges proceed with more caution in their deliberations than nV ,ly T nd lIe +L es of delay; and it is not only desirable, but in dspensably necessary, they should be eau tious, that they should not decide until they were certain they were correct, otherwise they would noti only commit the grossest injustice, but would bring down odium upon themselves, and contempt upon the Court
 1t is conceded, despatch is so necessary that 1t may be called virtue; but if improvi- dently exercised in administering the law, it becomes noxious evil. But, sir, notwth- standing the immense number of cases upon the docket, notwithstanding the labors now performed, it is said the Judges can and must dispose of all the business as it now exists, and as it comes before them; thus dooming them to perform the labors of Sysiphus; for so soon as they had disposed of their present busi- ness, and supposed they might enjoy some rest, they would again be subjected to the same labor, to the same incessant toll.
 II then, we continue system which has become so obnoxious, which has so many ob- Jectionable features, how Can we meet our constituents? What shall we say on our re- turn to them? What consolation can we af- ford to them? None, none: they must bear With patience all the delays incident to the law Yes, sir, the present system is in effect stop-iaw, without being direct enactment: M n i,,o 1t, are urged not to do so, but are told it must remain.
 Let usillustfate the effect of this stop law, by an example which must forcibly strike the minds of the members of the Senate The echanic, whose family is dependent upon his laborious cxertions for their daily bread. builds palace for his lordly neighbor, whoI riots in wealth, in all the luxuries and splen- dors Of life. He calls upcn his employer for payment, when he shall have completed the work lie IS told it is inconvenient to pay nm. Hls only alternative is, to enforce the payment ot his hard earned demand, by a sult at law, which would please his wealthy debtor; because, by the delays of the law, he could avoid repayment for the term of three years and half; thus compelling the mecha- nic to forego all the comforts and many of the necessaries of life. The same reasoning ap- plies to the honest farmer, and to the adyen- tnrous merchant. Call you this justice? No, sir: then let us provide against an evil of such frightful magnitude. When an action is in- stituted against an individual, and judgment recovered, the next inquiry is, how long he can avoid the payment of the debt, provided the case is carried to the Supreme Court his attorney gives him the information; an appeal is taken; it is placed upon the docket; and there it remains under lock and key for the space of three years. The system pro posed would remedy this defect; if so, why should we hesitate to adopt it?