Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1854-02-04

tors spoke briefly on Inc merits OF the DILL WIN
| ont taking vote, the Senate adjourned until to-
morrow morning, at 10 O'CLOCK, -..i..I r.,
| HoUsE-EvESING SESSION
FRIDAY, Feb. 3.
| Mr.. Bailey resumed'his discussion OF the Law
| Reform bill He thought he had shown in his pre-
vious remarks that there was an inherent difference
in the system Of Law and Equity practice, and that
the attempt to do away with the latter would be
futile; and the trainers of the bill had not attemp-
| ted to do it-they proposed to abolish the chan
Gerry court but not the system, for they were try
ing to engraft the system the law courts-there
would, under the bill, still be two courts though
only one Judge for both They complained of
evils but had failed 10 point them out or apply a
remedy. The plan now proposed had once been
tried in this State and so great the evils all
sing from it that, about 1927, it was abolished and
separate chancery courts were established. And
who ever heard any complaint against them until
1S4l-g No one. The evils now complained of are
due to another cause distinct from the principle of
| the courts. There were four chancelers in the
State and about 49 courts: imposing an enormous
amount of labor on the Judges he had known one
chancellor to have to travel 200 miles in one week,
and try four chancery dockets This is one cause
of the delay, and Of the evils complained OTTO
remedy it, increase the number of chancelors or
diminish the number Of courts There was anoth-
ct SldLc VI lSlIip-sSc
ors $500 yearll Can you expect competent
men to leave their business and give their whole
time to the courts for this ptiful sum- They can t
do t-for this salary is not sufficient for their sup
pert There is not really competent lawyer in
the State who does not make more; nay, two or
three times much as the Insignificant salary
of the Judges. Let gentlemen come to the rescue
and reform this evil, and he would go with them
heartily-but do not charge the evils arising from
cuStar of law yIEfc
again, this bill merges the chancery in the circuit
court this bill increase the labor of the Judges and
it will be necessary to increase their number: Why
not then let the chancery courts alone and increase
the number of Chancellors and their salaries. Here
is the true remedy for the evils unustly charged on
the present system Of practice. Let gentlemen
come up to this. This cry Of Reform, Reform =
was not the way to effect the object. He wanted
no defamation nor nvective, he wanted facts, and
arguments. But this bill not only proposes to
change the system Of practice but also the very
laws of evidence; it proposes to admit as compe-
tent witnesses who are interested IN the case An
interested persen mag Be an honest witness but
there is always danger Of the contrary and the law
followed the saviour's prayer lead US not into
temptation" He stated that il had been his inten-
ton to introduce bill to abolish the oath required
TO the answe: TO bill in chancery, because, IN the
whole course of his practice, he had scarcely ever
seen an answer drawn which contained the whole
truth and this bill multiplied oaths 10 an alarming
extent He thought it the most monstrous part of
the whole bill.
He could not undertake to point out the specific
defects of the bill-they were too numerous-but
10 order to derive the benefits claimed by its friends
you must change human nature entirely. As men
are now constituted it would DO impossible to ap-
ply the provisions of the bill 10 any useful purpose
Mr. Bailey then concluded his argument, which
had been listened to throughout with graet atten-
ton.
Mr. Cooper at the request of Mr. Stewart, with
drew his motion to indefinitely postpone the bill,
and Mr.. Stewart offered to amend the bill by strlk
ing out all after the enacting clause, and inserting
st his"-(and Mr.. s. held up the New York Re-
formed code, an enormous volume Of several hun
bred pagesD The chair decided that the gentle
man must aOrite out his bill in lieu in full before it
could come before the House. WhereupOn Mr..
Stewart amid much laughter, withdrew his amend
ment, and Mr.. Cooper renewed his motion to post
pone.
Mr. Buford then took the floor in support Of the
bill. lie was of opinion that this matter should re-
ceve the mature and deliberate consideration Of
every member of this House He had not the same |
advantage in point of law knowledge, as the gentle
man who had preceded him. But he had given |
this subject much study and reflection, and he had
formed his conclusions, and after two speeches had
been made by able lawyers against the bill, they
had failed to make any serious argument against its
provisions. He would proceed to examine some
oftheir positions. They had objected that several
actions might be included in one SO as TO
present at once many issues to the Jury. He could
not deny that this might happen but not in the
manner nor to the extent alleged by the opponents
of the bill. Mr.. B. proceeded TO show what would
be the operation of the two systems in stated
case. He had heard something said about "mak-
ing equity law, and law equity so as not to have
either law or equity he would notice ths because
he thought that the expression had been used in
order to produce some effect on this question when
it should come up for discussion He reviewed the
historical origin Of courts Of chancery at time
when Justice could not always be obtained at COM
mon law but through the Chancellor who was the
keeper ofthe Kings conscience. The same neces-
sity did not exist in this country. 1t had beenas-
serted on the other side that this bill abolished the
common law. (Mr Bailey explained. He had
not used the expression in the sense stated by Mr.
Buford He did not so intend it, Mr.. B. resumed.
He could see no reason for sending litigant from
one court to another before he could get justice for
he sake of mere technical formality in the case
He denied the assertion Of Mr. Bailey that the sys-
EN- proposed by this bill had been in use in this
State; it hsd never been in force in this State or
INV other
Mr. Bailey again rose in explanation. He had
aid that this bill placed the two courts of law and
hancery under one judge in one court and there
ore did not in fact abolish the chancery system.
Mr.. Buford again resumed and continued to dis
uss the effects and operations Of the law and chan
cry courts under the present system and under
hat proposed by his bill '-.
Mr. B. then directed bis attention to the remarks
# the gentleman from Monroe on last night. The
Gentleman had used many extravagant expressions;
e would leave such expressions to have what eff
ect they might on House celebrating on an i'm
ortant question. But the gentleman objected that
0 many different matters might be embraced in one
ction He would proceed to show by an ilustra-
on how far the objection was applicable. He
nowed from the law that these different causes Of
cton might all or any of them be tried separate G
by order of the court at the request of either par
'. C