Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1879-10-28
THE COST OF LITIGATION.

correspondent prOntaOly, ana winch VIC
would be glad if he and many others
should give attention. We recognize,
however, that as long as "PhI seeks
to justify an oppressive taxation oil
costs in our Courts he must be technic-
al, for the position has no merits to
support it.
OF what advantage Is it, Tor instance,
that we should discuss the difference
between what he terms "the neces-
sary" and "the imposed costs% We
cannot see any material distinction be-
tween the terms when used in this con-
nectiOn, and we are satisfied that when
a party, plaintiff or defendant, comes to
pay bill of costs he finds that which IS
necessary" is Imposed" upon him,
and that which is imposed" upon him
is necessary" He has the bill to pay
all the same whether it bea necessary
bill or an Imposed" bill, and he is not
fool enough to inquire the difference.
Or of what advantage is it that We
should discriminate between the costs
taxed against the plaintiffand that taxed
against the defendent ii one party has
the whole bill to pay? We supposed,
from the air of assurance and iniallibil-
ity with which "PHIL" pens his COM
municatiOns, that he was somewhat Ia
miliar with the practice OicOurts. Buthas
he not learned the common and univer-
sal rule, that the defeated party in a
case becomes responsible for the whole
bill OF costs? And if responsible, does
il matter to him whether the costs were
taxed against him or his opponent, or
Imposed" "On account Of the resist
ance OF the defendant"
The most unsophisticated litigant I'M
derstands that in bringing an action in
the Circuit Court he takes the risk OF the
,rLole costs. He may have just and
equitable claim against the defendant,
but no one-except "Phii'-haye we
heard assume that there is no risk in
the verdict Of ajury. Those most famil-
lar with courts are those who have least
faith in the verdict OF a jury. 1t has
come to be q common saying, by way OF
expressing the uncertainty Is to how a
Jury will decide, that "it is one OF the
things Deity don't know"
The RISK then, Of paving not only the
costs which a plaintiff incurs on his
own part when he enters a suit, butin-
ours also by the defendants resistance
to a just demand, and by which resist
ance he too often succeeds, is such arisk
as a prudent man, acting upon business
principles, will not incur upon small
claim. He must be actuated by 4 strong
er motive than the mere recovery OF the
debt, unless it be that the character OF
his evidence and his preparation for
presenting the case gives him an unusu-
al advantage over the defendant.
For these and many other reasons
We have advocated, and shall continue
to advocate, reduction in the costs OF
our judicial system. We regard it as
one OF the servereSt infections our peo-
pie suffer. When all the evils OF which
our people have complained in this
connection, are summed up, 1t
will be found that the matter
of costs is the one which cuts deepest.
1t is a surprise to Us to find any one
seeking TO justify the oppressive ex-
pense Of our system. But "PhiPs" po-
sition on this subject is akin to that
which he maintains toward the jury sys-
tenn. He has evidently not been keep
ing up with the times. He is living
i'm the "time-honored and thoroughly
tested" past. He has not heard, except
through the REGISTER, that the intelli-
gent sentiment OF the times is tending
with a determined tread toward Il
modification of the ''time-hOnored' jury
system. He therefore thinks the REGIS
TER guilty of great sacrilege in attacking
such "time-honored' institution. But
We recommend to his pcrusal the follow
ing comments upon the subject by a
distinguished writer in the Albany Lar
Journal, whom We feel assured, expresses
the sentiments of the most distinguished
lawyers and statesmen Of the day:
Trial by jury has become such lot
tcrv that il has given rise to this maxim:
IF YOU have strong case, try it before
a Judge or referee; ii you have weak
case, try it before a jury Night not
Incompetence be avoided and justice
more surely obtained by committing to
the Judges the decision of questions of
fact as well as questions of law?
This would neCeSSitate an increase in
the number of judges, but to this there
could be little objection. The amount OF
money actually expended every wear for
Jurors and the amount lostby those who
are forced % neglect their business in
order 10 act as jurors, if it were COM
putcd. would be found sufficient 10 pay
Tor seven Judges nj every court. Will II
cost more 10 buy a judge than juror
The Judge is dependent upon the Peo-
pie: he i their servant, and the dignity
ot that service, the honor OF the office,
The responsibilities of the position, the
fear of detection and disgrace, all tend
10 render him invulnerab.e TO bribery
and % place him above suspicion. II,
however, as il is sometimes the case, a
man of low character Is raised To- the
bench. and i induced To sell himself, he
at least sells himself dearly. On the
other hand, "a juror can often be bought
for few dollars, and the purchase of
Juror defeats Justice as completely Is the
purchase OF a Judge.
The Jury system, rs it now exists, Is
beneficial To- only two clasSes-proies-
siuual Jurors and jury lawyers Men OF
the first class owe 20 il their subsistence;
and, when placed upon the jury, they
maintain the cause Of those who employ
them with a tenacity that inSures vie
tory. Men Of the second class exist by
reason Of the system. They pilot 4 weak