The Emporia weekly news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1881-1889, 1883-01-04

6uOu1Q Do l4TOk6Q IN CASES OF muTQ6E.
But this Is no excuse for leaving the
law in Its present unsatisfactory con-
dItlon, as our manhood dictates that the
death penalty should be executed In a
reasonable time after sentence, or that
the horrors Of an anticipated hanging
should be ended by q Sentence of I'M
prisonment for lite. The person who
now commits the crime OF murder, with
all its attendant horrors, is on an equal
ity with the criminal who steals but
twenty dollars, and is free to murder his
keeper, orthe warden of the prison, with
the assurance that score of murders
does not increase his punishment. There
are now In the penitentiary about TWEEN
ty-five persons who are under tie sem
tence of death, who have all the kindly
treatment, and the benefits of all rules,
and the laws made to ameliorate the
sad condition of prison life, while the
victims of their crime sleep In death, and
the relatives or the deceased are taxed to
feed and elothe the ones who robbed
the wife of husband, and the children
of father. The existing law is simply
an evasion of plain manly duty, and
should be amended at once, though not
made retroactive in ats operations; it
should be certain as to the murders
committed in the future.
THE DISTRICT COURTS.
The business in the district courts has
increased to such an extent. and the dis
trlcts ara so large, that in most of them
the judges are unable to transact the
business, and dispose of cases in a reason
able time. While the judges, as class
are able, industrious and earnest In their
efforts to expedite business. the aceu,
mutation of cases in the last few years
has made 1T impossible for them to dis
charge their important duties with jus.
tlce to lltigants, or to the interests of
the public.
term to term for want of time for trial,
till in some counties it amounts almost
to denial of justice. This delay and
postponement entails officers costs and
witness fees, term after term, until wit
nesses remove from the jurisdiction of
the courts, compelling parties to incur
large expense to obtain evidence by de-
positions that could have been had, had
the courts been able to dispose of cases
ia reasonable time; thus defeating
justice, or defeating q poor litiRant by
forcing him out of court on account of
his inability to meet the accumulated
cost of this continuous delay.
While it may be claimed that this de-
lay is not at the expense of the public,
the argument is only specious 1t is a
charge or indirect tax on those who
have 10 invoke the authority of the
courts to vindicate their rights, or to
protect their person from wrong. or
their property from Spoliation, and is
cruel and monstrous wrong when
persons are charged with crime and de-
layed in ylndicating their innocence or
losing their evidence by this delay, or
laying long seasons in Jail while not
aole to give bond; thus violating
the principle of our constitution which
declares that all persons shall have re
medy by due course OF law, and justice
administered without DELAY. The ex-
pense of the courts, the increase of the
fees of witnesses, boarding prisoners In
Jail, and jaries, amount to more,
annually, in some counties at each term,
than twice the salary of tie Judge who
holds the court.
A remedy for this difficulty should be
provided, without delay, and therefore
recommend that the legislature redis-
trict or remodel the judicial districts, so
that the work in each may be equal
lied, that business of the courts can be
disposed of with less delay than at pres
emit. But am satisfied this plan would
only produce temporary relief, as most
of the districts are now so large that re-
ducing them a third. or a half, would not
furnish the relief required or needed,
and that the only sure and practicable
remedy for the difficulty surrounding
the administration of the laws, is the
creation of at least three more judicial
districts, in addition to equalizing the
territory and business of the present
ones.
This is matter of serious concern
and it is to be hoped that tha present
session of the legislature will witness
the Inauguration of measures for i'm
mediate relief. In this connection it ii
also important to inquire whether such
legislation should not be had as tc
prevent the encumberinR of the docket;
of the district courts with petty APP
peals from justice courts, which Is &
means resorted to by unsuccessful liti
giants to obtain delay that is assured Il
them by the crowded condition of the
dock cts of the courts.
THE JUDICIARY.
the trainers of the constitution hav'
taken special care to secure, as tar a
they could, an honest, faithful ant
impartial judiciary. In defining tn
Limitation upon the political ambition
of the justices of the supreme
and judges of the district courts
Sec. Is of art. 8 of the constitu
ton provides that: "Such Justice
!. or judges shall receive no fees o
perquisites, nor hold any other Office O
profit or trust under the authority Q
the state or United States, during tn
term of Office for which said justices an
4 Judges shall be elected" etc.
In the case of the state sx rel Watso
VS. Cobb, End KS. r. 80, the court
gives construction of this clause of tn
constitution. On page so the cour
i says: "The object sought to be accom-
: plIshed by these provisions, is that on
high judicial officers may be remove
as far as possible from the %emptatio
. to use the power and influence of thei
positions and authority fot their ow
4 Advancement; to prevent their minC
, from being distracted from their le9i
innate duties by ambitious hopes an
! struggles for preferment; to raise tbel
above those political and partisan col
tests so unbecoming the desired purit,
: impartlality and calmness ofthe judiei
; character"
The supreme court. in giving I'll