Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1872-03-27
THE LAW'sDELAY.
Judge Baxter's Address before the
House of Representative.

| SuOSe BaxtefS AOureSS DefOre Tn
House of Representatives.
In accordance with the wish ofthe Judge
who met here last week, and by permission
Of the House of Representatives, Judge n
Baxter, Of the Circuit Court, Of Davidson
County, addressed that body, yesterday, OF
the proposed reforms in the administration
of practice in the Civil and Criminal Court.
OF the State. He commenced by saying
that he did not know how it was with the
General Assembly, but the Judges were be
ing constantly assailed with such questions
as: "Why can we not get our cases de
ternined within reasonable time? Have
| you not courts enough and Judges enough?'
Before the war, the dockets were kept
| clear, but now such was not the case, and
suits were still pending which had been
| filed as far back as five or six years ago.
Our judicial system, Judge Baxter said,
was like trunk railroad. II the feeders OF
the latter crowded it with more freight than
it could carry, the only remedy was to re-
| duce the amount Of freight by increasing
the charges. So, if the pressure from the
inferior courts upon the Supreme Court was
excessive, the temptation to litigate should
be diminished.
Litigation was an evil-a necessary evil,
and therefore to be tolerated, but not en-
couraged. Why were appeals to the Supreme
Court so numerous at present? In at least
three-fourths of the cases the object was to
obtain delay. The clogged condition of the
dockets was such that those against whom
judgments were found could count upon
having four or five years in which to pay.
Litigants had got the start of the Supreme
Court, and so long as this inducement Of de-
lay was offered the dockets could never be
relieved. Even cases appealed solely for
delay were fought with as much persistence
as if the appellants expected to win. How,
then, was this to be prevented-how dis
courage such litigation, without doing injus-
tice to any? 1t was not asked that the right
of appeal be taken away, but simply that
those against whom judgments were found
in the Supreme COurt-With certain excep-
tions-be required to pay 128 per cent. in
terest from the time the appeal was taken.
This was the law from 1894 to 1861, during
which time the courts never had any trouble
in keeping their dOckets clear. Owing to
the distressed state of the country, relief
measures were passed in 1861 and the rate
was reduced to per cent. iu 1866.
There was no injustice, Judge Baxter in
sisted, in requiring 12tt per cent. interest.
Money was worth that in the streets of any
city in the State, and could be loaned legal
ly at 10 per cent. Yet a man could now
borrow your money On bis note, keep you
out of the use of it for years, and then have
to pay you only 6 per cent. If all persons
taking appeals to the Supreme Court
from inferior courts-as far back
as Justices Of the Peace-were re-
quired to give bond and security for paying
the principal of the debt, with I25 Der
cent. interest, the number of appeals
would, be was confident, be reduced 25 or
so per cent. Men could not afford sucn a
rate, and would pay up to avoid litigation. |
The expenses incurred in carrying on the |
Courts was next referred to by Judge Baxter
as matter demanding serious consideration. |
The books of the COmptroller's Office show |
I'd very small proportion Of the burdens
borne by the people. Those who desired |
o inform themselves should 90 in the
County Court Clerks offices, and they
would find that we nay more to support |
he Judiciary than for all the current ex-
lenses of the State Government. David
'on county had population about four
md a half times as large as the
Iverage population Of the other coun-
les Of the State, and iuries cost this
county SIS, 700 per annum, which would
,e an average Of $3.50 to each county.
There being ninety-One counties, the ag-
Iregate cost to all the counties was $685.,
05, besides 252,757 days lost from the pro-
luctive industry Of the State and worth
s many dollars, which, added to the
mount paid for juries, would make
,75S, 1862 as the cost of juries to the people
f Tennessee for only one year. The num-
er Of days lost by jurors in a single year,
given to one man, would make him $50
nd IL months old. New, how could the
reater part of this enormous expenditure
e avoided. In this way: The ircuit Judge
elieyed that in very great number of cases
hey could give satisfaction by deciding, |
7ithout juries, on the facts of cases,
S they now did on points of law. Chan
sllors, as experience showed, decided |
Icts as satisfactorily as juries, and Circuit
judges could do the same thing. 1t was
rOposed that there should be separate
Ockets for the jury and non jury cases.
he former could be tried first and the jury
ischarged, so that when the other docket
as taken up there would be no expense
1cept the salary Of the Judge. Let any !!
an have a jury who would pay SO for it.
e could not complain, for the jury would
,st the county S24 and if parties insist on
ling to law over their differences, why
lOuld other people bear the expense?
Judge Baxter said it was not urged that
e jury system was inefficient. He had
verence for it, on account of its antiquity, ,
Id his experience was that verdicts of cir !
lit juries were almost invariably reliable. !
be only question was as TO the expense. !
)uld we afford the luxury of trying law
its by jury when they could be tried by
G Circuit Judges with equal satisfaction I
lidgants at half the cost? If the people
Tennessee were in condition to bear
9 expense, then he would say that the 81
~ system ought to stand.
He concluded by saying that the sugges-
ms thus briefly touched upon were made
the judges as the result of their expert a
Ce and in the interest of the people and of
2 State, to relieve them at least partially
the burdens of which such great COM
int was now being made.
The remarks of Judge Baxter were lis 81
led to with much interest by the House,
STATE OF THE WEATHER. ss