Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1881-11-11

/ States Supreme Court is overcrowded
/ with cases. There are some twelve hum
I bred on its argument docket, and the
/ annual increase exceeds the number
/ which the court can, by the utmost IN
/ dustrv, dispose Of; so that the evil is
| growing, and the frightening period
which elapses between the taking OF an
appeal and its hearing is oppressive to
suitors and sometimes denial oil JUS
tice. Without relief in the near future
the court will be swamped by its docket.
We do not propose to consider the nu-
merous plans OF relief, but merely to
call attention to an aspect OF this matter,
we have not seen noticed. This immense
| volume of litigation is not the natural or
necessary business OF the Federal Courts.
Ia is largely due to the legislation OF the
Republican party, and is stimulated by
the ideas held and diffused by that
parry. When JOHN MARSHALL became
Chief Justice, there were about
ten cases annually added to the docket
OF the Supreme Court. Now, with q
population ten times greater, there are
forty times as many new cases every
wear. Compared with any previous
decade, the present shows docket
greatly exceeding any proportionate in
crease in tine population or business OF
the county.
But is there room for wonder when
We recall the policy OF the Republican
party: Until the Coles case it was
never heard that the L. 5. Courts
could punish Il State Judge for the
mode in which he Interpreted and APP
piled q State law, nor until the cases OF
the OHIO and Maryland judges OF cleo
tions, that the Federal courts could SUI
peryise State officers IN executing State
laws. But when it is remembered that
these laws OF Republican Congress,
which were thus upheld by a Republl-
can court, had no other origin than
party necessity, and from but part OF
tine machinery through which the party
holding the Federal administration
seeks to entrench itself beyond
the reach OF ordinary popular revoIu-
tons, the enormity Of the whole thing
will be appreciated.
Bat aside from the actual extension
OF the jurisdiction OF the Federal courts
! for partisan ends, that party has fOstered
/ the idea that even in common civil suits,
where their jurisdiction is concurrent
| with that of the State courts, there IS
superior dignity, or power, or something
/ else attaching to them which makes
| them attractive to suitOrs.
| This is q recent doctrine, and is one
| of the lnSidious forms OF the centraiiza.
| ton toward which all things latterly
Lave swung. 1t is true that in contests
between citizens of different States, ju-
risdiction is given to the Federal Courts,
/ either originally or 10y right OF removal,
/ and wisely given, for there are times
and places when nonresident cannot
4 get justice in State court, but such in
| stances are rare and exceptional, and
confined almost exclusively to jury tri-
/ ala.
The great mass OF litigation for every
| purpose OF ever justice and OF able and
expeditions decision, may continue, as
I IN times past, to seek the State Courts.
In this way the Federal Courts may be
relieved OF much of tie business which
unnecessarily crowds their dockets, and
have ample time for that which natur-
ally, and, under the Constitution and
LAYS, properly belongs to them.
1t is TO the credit Of our coun-
try that its Judiciary, State and
National, has generally commanded
confidence for Integrity and ability. Ii
there have Iatteriy been any couspicu-
Gus exceptions, they have generally
been found among the Federal judges
in the South. who seek TO repay by
party services their unieserved promo
ton. The action oi some of them even
IN civil suits, has been pronounced by
the Supreme Court as Il blot on our
civilization. The latest 20 trail his robe
in partisan mire has been Judge ALEN-
ANpEG EIvEs, oi Virginia, who has
added another TO the list OF his disgrace
iul political actions, 10y his zeal in the
late Readjuster campaign.