Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1875-02-22
spEorAL LRorsLArroE ron SHELBY.

FROM tue puouruSu P~tOCCSuAnbo v
the Legislature, we End that q bill haI
been introduced by Senator Haynes, o
this county, looking to the sbolishmen.
Of the Second Chsneery and SecOnC
Circuit Courts of Shelby. This is spe
cial legislation. snd our Senators and
Representatives should ascertain fully,
and not hastily, whether this is the proper
step to take, by a consultation with the
lawyers who have business in these as
well as other courts Of our county, before
pressing the matter to s 6nality. We
have taken pains 70 bring out the opin-
ion Of many members Of the legal pro
fession here on this point and find that
opinion, in every instance. adverse to
the proposed Sill introduced BY Senator
Haynes. They think thsi it viii act
adversely 10 the best interests Of our
people aud their matters OF litigation.
Besides this, We have looked into the
working OF cur Chaneery Courts, and
VIII give It's history as we fnd it and
believe it TO BE- The ChsDcery Courts,
when organized under the new eonsdtu-
ton. ioun5 upon the ola dookets over
foar thousand Ssnses then pending.
This Ne found from a faithful inspection
Of he proper books. Since their estsb-
lishmsn. We discover taat thirty Eve
hundred rev bills have been fled in the
two courts, dating from June. 1870.
Something over three thousand
cases are still pending and
u~ndisposed Of; JET the two ChaneeilOrs.
Judges Morgan and Walker, and the
lAtters predecessors. have been in SEES.
sion almost daily since the summer Of
1870. Each one OF these gentlemen
has done as much work, and more, than
any other chancellors in the State; and
there are more causes now in either one
OF these courts than can be found on the
entire dockets Of any two chancellors in
the State. except possibly at Nashville
and Knoxville. SO far as the clerks Of
our Chancery Courts are concerned, they
never r~aneivA a dollarofAaAfs hsam The
county or State under any ciroum-
stances, and if the parties to the suits in
these courts are insolvent, the clerks
get nothing, besides paying from their
own pockets the charges Of enrolment,
transcripts and other documents neees-
sary TO be drawn up in the case. 1t is
asserted, and on good authority, too,
that when both these court we're in one,
the Clerk and Master, Aston, did not
realize $4,000 per snnum, With all the
advantages the one court threw to him.
The question Of fabulous salaries, then,
is simply bOsb, and the retreuchment TO
be gained by the abolishment Of one Of
these courts will be more than doubly
oVerbalaucsd by the confusion and ez
pense to all parties consequent upon
such q change. Then, in the
opinion OF some OF our very
ablest lawyers, vsry grave doubts
exist as to the power of the Legislature,
uuder the new constitution, to abolish
either a Chancery or q Circuit Court.
In article six, section one, Of the old con-
sitution we find stated that the judi
clal power Of this State shall be vested
in one Supreme Court, in such inferior
courts as the Legislature shall from time
to time ordain aud establish, and in the
judges thereof, aad 10 Justices Of the
Peace" And in the same article and
section Of the new constitution we read
that the Judicial power Of this State
shall be vested in one Supreme Court
aud IN such Circuit, Chancery and other
inferior courts as the Legislature shall
from time to time establish and 10 the
judges thereof, and in Justices Of the
Peace" thus recognizing the Chaneery
and Circuit Courts as existing iustitu-
tons Of the State" clothed already by
statute With certain jurisdiction and
powers as Courts. And Chancery Courts
have been a part of the judiciary system
OF our State even before the State had a
separate existence, aud certainly have a
greater rlght,o constitutional protection
than County Courts, which are not called
County Courts 10 either of the sections
referred to, and yetin the White county
commissioners case, which every intelli
gent lawyer is familiar with, the Supreme
Court decided that the Legislature hat
no legal power to abolish such
Court. We say again, that i
is tie opinion Of many Of our very bes
lawyers that when the Legislature ha
created or called into existence q cireui
or chancery court it has exhauste,
all its powers, aud a revocation
Of its action in the matter should be well
considered before enacted. We hav,
penned this article in no spirit Of incon
slaerate opposition to the bill alluded {,
above, or for the purpose of dictation t,
the Legislature in its action, but simpl,
for the purpose Of putting the matte.
before them as we find it regarded here
Personally, we have no interest in eithet
the passage or defeat of the bill. W
are Mother a Chsncery or Circuit Cour
Judge or Clerk, and of all people, we ar,
in q position to view the matter dispas
sionately and for the best, and we havI
done 50. II our Legislators take !
otherwise, they will simply make q mis-