The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1873-05-17
DIR JUDICIAL SYSTEM.

we puDllSn Ill aHotHef Coiuhiu
somewhat indignant letter, which the
reader will readily recognize to be from
a gentleman of the Bar. Our legal
friend seems to have entirely misunder-
stood. or misconstrues our article on
the judicial system, published in last
weeks WIG. 1t was not personal
1t was against the SYSTEM that we
penned that article. Can our cores
pendent OK" deny that the delays OF
which we spoke, do take place under
the three Judge system? Will he deny
that the taxpayers, already overbur-
dened, do pay $500, instead of $4,000
to the judges on this judicial circuit ?
Will he pretend that the three judges
receiving Us salary $500, do more
work, or work more satisfactorily than
the one Judge who received $4,000
As learned as the present Bench is,
does he expect the people of Cecil will
believe that they have more learning or
legal ability than Judge Constable or
Judge Price? If $4,000 supplied our
Bench with such judges as these two,
why should the taxpayers be COM
PEELED to pay an excess OF $4,000 Tor
Judges, who, to say the least, have not
more of the qualifications needed than
the two judges above named? If
$4,000 gave US judges as good as we
want-aye as good as we ever had
why pay $500 for judges no better?
Let taxpayers ponder these questions
If the farmer can purchase lime for 20
cents a bushel, why should he be anx-
ious to pay sl.OO for an article no bet
ter, possibly not so good?
If case is put off term after term,
and the party compelled to pay his wit
nesses, and the Clerks fees and Sher-
ifs fees, with other incidental expenses
of protracted litigation, for series of
terms, instead of having his case tried
at the earliest term it was on the dock
ct; is not this direct tax upon the
people? Every man is liable to have
case in court or to be summoned as
witness for his neighbors, and be logged
to Elkton term after term, to the neg
lect and ruin of his business, at one
dollar day, an insufficient sum to
pay his necessary expenses, with the
most rigid economy on his part
Speedy justice is the only sort OF JUS
tice that we have knowledge of. Any
thing else, however specious the name,
is but injustice! This sort of levy may
not be called o TAX, because not laid by
the County Commissioners; but it
serves to make the people poorer, and
the county poorer, by impoverishing the
people. Our correspondent misunder-
stands US. We did not intimate that
the people are not willing to pay for
speedy justice; but they are unwilling
to pay for baffled and delayed justice.
Whether innocent or guilty, every man
should have his case tried fully and
fairly, and his counsel should have every
facility afforded him to present the law
and the facts which bear upon his
clients case, to the court and jury
We do not complain, nor neither do the
people, of time necessarily spent in pro-
noting the ends of justice. Under
Judge Price, was not every citizen,
through his legal representative in
court, allowed the fullest limits to dis
cuss his case, and defend his interests?
and yet Judge Price transacted all the
business and adjourned the court in two
weeks. Nobody complained then.
We have been tender to that neces-
sary evil-the lawyers, not because OF
anv inherent merits they possess as a
class professionally. Under all govern
ments founded on law, they represent,
before courts of justice, suffering men,
women and childen, whom the law in
it's justice presumes to be innocent-and,
who ignorant themselves, have the
right, by the laws of the land and COM
mon humanity, to be heard through
their counsel fully, freely and patiently
and to have every facility accorded them
to make clear to the court or jury their
innocence or their rights.
Our correspondent az" speaks of
memorable rules, limiting speeches and
arguments of counsel without any sort
of regard to the Importance of the case;
or any consideration, whittier it be pos
sible to discuss fairly the questions of
law or fact, or both, in twenty minutes.
Will he tell us whether the judges are
SO limited? Many reasons may be
given why counsel should be suffered
even encouraged to argue every case
fully for his client but why is not a
decision of the court as complete, and
full, and satisfactory, if simply AN
NoUNcED? The party in whose favor
the decision is made, is content with
the mere announcement while the de-
feated party will not be soothed by the
most weighty and learned reasons
which decide against him. Then why
consume time by a decision extending
over an hour or two in it's delivery ?
The outsiders don't understand the
reasons, or if they do, have no interest
in them. The jury is bound by the
mere decision, whether the reasons in
its favor are good or bad and if the
defeated party is not satisfied with the