Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1880-02-19
THE BorroM FACT.


hi5 former letter discussing the Consti-
tutional Amendments. At his request
the latter is published in the RroIsrER
this morning, in another column.
We took exceptions to Mr.. FARMS
WoRrH's first letter, because We under
stood him to oder as 4 remedy Tor the
defects OF our Judiciary system, Il plan
that would remove the expense OF Ia
whole system iron the people and place
il upon those who used the Courts
MIR. FARxswoRru complains Of tins In
depreciation being put upon his first let
| ter. and vet, in his second letter We un-
derstaud him TO reatfirm the same
position. We quote: But let all the
costs be taxed up, upon the final deci-
sion OF all cases tried in the courts
against the parties adjudged in fault. Is
/ this not right in principle? Why tax a
part Of the costs against all such as are
proven to be in iaultand not include the
Jury costs also, that the Treasury may
be reimbursed
Ii is this remedy which Mr.. FARMS
WORTH oilers IA the first and last Oi ms
letters, as 4 means Of reforming our ju-
dietary system, To which we object We
| claim now, As We have heretofore, that
to adopt such a plan, would close the
doors ui our courts against all but the
wealthy, and would bankrupt One-hali
| OF the suitors Of the state vino iecl that
they have u to go into the courts.
\ court IL ia its nature just rs prop
erly a public institution as isaturnp'Se.
Yet all men DO not directly use either.
We place a tOllgate on some turnplkes
| and collect toll from those who actually
use them. That is right Is tar as It
goes. But would it bc right that all the
roads OF a county should he kept up ex-
| c~luSiyelv by collections at ~tollgateS2
There are merchants aud professional
men and other classes Of property hold
ers, representing perhaps, the greater
part oi the wealth oi every county { a
who do not 90 over the county roads
once in a year, Yet the roads are Just
As much, or more, advantage to them
than To those who 90 back and forth
upon them every day. Shall the travel
ing class pay all and the local wealth to
which they contribute, pay Uoihins'
- il is with reference tn the Courts.
There is not an individual citizen with
in the commonwealth that Is not benefit.
Ell by them-that is not ~.dePendrnt
upon them Tor the security OF his lille,
| liberty and property. Vet only n out
Of an hundred finds occasion to use the
courts once q year. Those who DO Use
them are largely of the poor, the lGno-
rant, the inexperienced aud oppressed.
Men of tact, OF wealth. OF buSlnCSS cX'
pcrience can generally take care Of
| themselves They don't iatl into pits
| and snarrS. hut, nevertheless, the very
tact that a tribunal always stands open
10 them and to all men, Tor the redress
OF u grievance, Is Of greater indirect All
| vantage As 4 restraining, moral iutlu-
cncc, to the man ot property than tu the
poor. although the ivrmcr may never
use il and the latter may often use II.
Now let Mr.. FNRNswORrH apply his
principal vi Saddling the entire expense
of the judicial system Of the State upon
those who use the courts, and the
natural aud inevitable result will be
that the poorer classes will bear nearly
the whole burden, while the wealthy,
which receive the greatest it
direct advantage and protection, will
be almost entirely exempt.
tdoeS not suffice To answer that III
man is shown to bc at fault when he
goes into the courts, he ought to pay
the Gusts. Very often that would
Oe 4 right principle to apply, hut IN the
majority of eases would be exceedingly
oppressive. In nine eases out OF
ten, perhaps, both parties toa contested
suit consclentiously believe themselves
to bc right The masses Of men cannot
post themselves upon, and canuot COM
prrhcud the complicated science ot law.
The attorneys they consult before con-
testing a suit very often believe that each
of their clients are IN the right. They
So ADVISE them. IL is impossible tn
determine in advance oi the trial,
what the rulings ot the court may BE-
upon the principles ri law involved.
Men thus, in the majority OF cases, ~
To law conscicntiously, and in 4 manly
contention Tor their rights under the
law. Is It right that when a nan is
thus seeking his own, and 10y a mISln-
depreciation OF ignorance OF the law, or
by the misconduct OF mlsiudgmcnt OF
the Jury; or by the failure or talSlty oi
testimony, he should be- mulcted intoa
bill OF cost that almost Ii not quite
b~ankruptS himI Would moi he rist
lsi, Of mourning such disaster through
the uncertainty OF the courts, deter a
prudent man, although believing in his
ease. from going into the courtSl Would
it not operate to brighten out OF the
courts all but the mar OF unlimited
means, or the ~uuScrupulous rascal who
had no property that could be made
liabIe9 Is it not in tact u virtual denial
oi the guarantee OF the bill Of rights,
which opens the courts to all mem
Now. We agree with MIR. FlRNSwoEru,
that it is proper TO put 4 check upon un-
Scrupulous men against using the courts
al HJihm iOr uniusiiiable ends, and at
the expense OF the public, but We donot
agree with him in the remedy he pro-
poses ior our judicial Ills. We alSc agree
with him that this matter Of costs in "a