The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1873-05-24
y'tT rs g<<il Ms1yht9
ELkTON. MAY n, 1873.
OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM.

Our only mOtlVe DelnS 10 nave the
subject of our Judicial System venti-
lated, we give place this week to an
article signed Little Elk" assailing
some of our positions. In doing so,
however, we must say to Little Elk !"
that he has in this instance undertaken
task beyond his powers-a hopeless
task. In our opinion it is simply i'm
possible for any man successfully to
defend against the deeply indignant tax
payers, system condemned alike by
all men and by all parties.
Little Elk " thinks, or broadly init
mates at least, that the delays and ex-
penses are chargeable solely to the law
yers, and claims credit for the Bench
that 1.-The judges have made some at
tempts to bride and hold back the law
yers in their long-winded speeches on
the law and facts, which are both in most
cases as well understood by the court
and jury as the lawyers" Is IT TRUE
THAT ALL THE LoNG-wINDED SPEECH
Es" COME ERoM THE LAWYERS? But, if
true, how does this make in favor of the
System espoused by our correspondent !?
Had not Judge Price and Judge Consta-
BILE the same long-winded speeches to
contend with? Those judges made no
rules to restrain them. Every lawyer
argued his case until he thought he had
said everything necessary, without
interruption from these distinguished
Judges, and yet the business was trans
acted in two weeks. We do not mean
to defend the interminable gas for
which lawyers are celebrated all the
world over, but they cannot possibly
waste more time now when restricted
to twenty minutes, than they did form
erly when unrestrained by any rules of
Court limiting the length of their
speeches. No one talked more eloquent
ly and lcarnedly than Judge Consta-
BILE when at the Bar, but upon the Bench
he was as reticent as our distinguished
President. He allowed the long-wind-
ed lawyers AT THE BAR to do all the
talking: so also with Judge Price
Little Elk's" logic is this (and
we commend it to Dogberry)- under
Judges Constable and Price the law
yers discussed every question of law
and fact to their and their clients
hearts content, and yet there was no
delay.i in the public business, but on the
contrary the utmost despatch. Under
Judges Robinson, Wickes and Stump
the lawyers do NOT discuss every ques-
ton of law and fact to their and their
clients hearts content, and yet THERE
Is delay in the public business, and no
Observation-Disclosures the LAWYERS are
the cause of delay CD This is some
thing astonishing to be sure. But
again: he thinks the frivolous nature of
the cases brought now, is the cause of
the delay. He THEN ADMITS THE DE-
LAY. Does he mean to say it takes
longer to try frivolous, than an i'm
portant case? But were there no" friv-
olous cases during Judge Prices term,
and under the one judge system on
the contrary were not the same class of
cases before the Court then as now !?
If he disposed of them speedily" why
cannot the same thing be done now !?
Cases frivolous and important will not
together, make up the number tried
formerly.
care the judges Or the Bar RESPONSE
BILE for the time so uselessly occupied
by our courts in disposing of such
cases." asks Little Elk" (rather a
delicate question:. But if the respon-
sibility lies, as Little Elk" thinks it
does, between the judges and the Bar,
and if the Bar is bridled," as he adj
mits it is, how, under such circum-
stances, the Bar can be sadded with
the responsibility of the delays, sur
passes our comprehension. Under the
new rules, bridling" them, the law
yers cannot protract the case-there.
fore they cause the delay! Verify a
Daniel come to judgment, yea Dan.
iel!"
But we are no special advocate for
the Bar. Let the lawyers bear their
own sins of whatever magnitude they
may be, but Little Elk's" efforts
to shift responsibility for the delay Of
justice in our Court upon the Bar, in
our opinion is dismal failure.
Judges Chambers, Eccleston and
Hopper, prior to 1851, conducted the
business satisfactorily" Little Elk >
thinks. We have no disposition to cast
any discredit on the judges. Our com
plant is against the SYSTEM, not the
men who are judges under the system
Judge Chambers was most accom-
plished and learned judge, and under
his able administration, the evils of the
system may not have been SO severely
felt, or if felt, may be forgotten now
He sat here over twenty years ago; but
the fact is undeniable that in 1851 a
Constitutional convention abolished the
system, and it is fair presumption that
they had good reasons for SO doing, rs
the members of that convention had
lived under the three judge system
Whether the people of that day grum.
bled at the three judge system or not
we do not pretend to know, but we do
know that they almost unanimously
L 4 - PI1