Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1885-01-29
TEE M,KHuKrEA MI.
Tho FesBtng of OpponitiOB 20 its
PnsaRRe InorenHen

Tho FeAlhng of Opposition 10 Its
Passage increases.
The uDanimIty Of thu opposition fr IN
all In crested parties to Senator Nc
Whorter's bill, which ia aimed al tho
Abo ition OF the civil Jurisdiction OF the
February aud September terms Of Q, urt,
10 surprise to even the advoestes OF the
unpopular measure. About half the mem.
bers Of the bar were approached Saturday
and all chserfully appended their sigma.
tures to the circumstances. Monday the
CANVASS was continued and 40 names Of
praotioing attorneys were signed to the
paper asking for . continuance OF the
courts 90 they now are This
comprises nearly the entire memb YBhip
Of the legal fraternity OF the county In
active practice, and includes sill the lead
Il g attorneys. The movement Of re-
monstrance will shortly bs seconded, In
all possibility by the business men OF
this city, who desire to express them
eslves In opposition to the measure.
Senator MoWhorter contributes q
lengthy article to Mondays Asps
giving In the form Of an interview what
he designstes as history Of the act
creating the extra sessions Of the court.
BE claims that in 1881 Representative e.
g. Bradford Of this city, introduced the
measure for the. creation Of the court
into the House under an obscure title;
that Il had passed the lower branch Of
the Legislature before its full pur
port was made known, and that
II was referred TO q committee, OF which
he (AoWhcrter) was chairman. An
adverse report upon It was made, and the
measure failed to pass In the Senate.
The proceedings OF the Legislature for
that season show that Mr.. MoWhorter Ia
entirely wrong In his statement except
as regards to the defeat Of the measure.
Mr.. MoWhorter charges In his tinter-
view" that Representative George Il
Bates introduced the amendment provid
ing for the terms In question under an
obscure title, and that II pst sed the
House and Senate under suspension Of
rules without any public knowledge Of
its purport.
Mr.. Bates was shown the statement
Monday morning by reporter Of the
GAZETTE, and pronounced II unquslifedly
false SO far as II had any reference to
him. Discussing the matter further, he
aAid:
"The subject Of the necessity Of the
additional terms Of court in this county
was brought forward IS leading feature
Of the inadequaoy Of our present judicial
system, and fully discussed ct the first
general meeting Of the members Of the
bar OF the whole State held at Whining
ton early In the session. Il WAS under
stood by the lawyers Of this county that
some fears at 6rst entertained by some OF
the Kent and Sussex gentlemen present
As to the effect Of the n easure were re-
moved by discussion, and that there was
. general acquiesoense in the view that
semi-annusl terms Of court made II impos-
sible to transact the business OF this
county, outside OF that meeting although
have heard and talked OF the subject
with many people oannotipow rscollect
any one, except Mr.. MoWhoi ter, who did
not approve OF Its necessity. With re
speos TO the action OF the General Assem-
bly, Mr.. MoWhortsr's accuracy and
knowledge may easily be tested by any
one who will examine the facts The bill
was mot introduced by me, but was drawn
by me and was introduced by Mr.. Justis,
who with other of my colleagues were
kind enough frequently to attend to mat.
tiers for me to relieve me from the neces-
sity of frequently leaving the CHAIR. This
bill was probably put In charge Of MI.
Justis because b, vas ohalrm1u Of the
committee on Revised Statutes and the
SCOPE OF the bill was explained 10 him. IL
had any desire 10 conceal the effort OF 5
bill should hardly have given II to Mr..
Justis, who knew 10 be one Of the most
careful and acute members Of the House
and probably as ospsbls as most lawyers
OF understanding this effect Of an amend
msnt OF q stAtuts The committee re-
ported II with an amendment, and when
1t was taken up for consideration left
the chair and explained II fully as did
every public bill I ever introduced.
The bill was mot introduced or passed
In snybody's interest except that Of the
general public. To speed litigation 10
the interest Of clients not OF lawyers.
Either It's effect nor operation are COR
rsotly stated In the article referred 10
a. any one osn readily ascertain by In
quiry. For myself, have neither turn
NOR inclination for any controversy with
Mr.. MoWhorter upon the question Of my
rsotitude as = legislator, and shall engage
question Of the wishes OF the people Of
NdW OhstAo uVuhtyt II tuo mcmucEn vi
Kent and Sussex think in the light Of
the election returns that Mr. MoWhorter
is the best advios they oIu find as to the
sentiment Of this county and especially
Of the farmers in 1t, they have the power
and can repeal this measure Of reform
which has been earnestly demanded here,
TO my knowlsd for at least 10 years. The
fact is that It is folly to lesislate about
terms until the judicial amendment ia
disposed Of, as IL II is ratified the whole
question Of terms throughout the State
should be revised on consultation with
the bar in each county"
10 his 'interv'sw" printed Monday
Senator MoWhNT'sr denies that he
threatened TO defeat th. Judiciary smsnd
ment II his bi isi!si to pass To q
representative OF this paper in this cfice
Mr.. MoWhorter STATED that the two
amendments (the judiciary and the one
introduced by him) are In balsnce and
the defeat of the one means the death Of
the other. "The iudicis y amendment y
he continued Significantly, ''oould bt
gotten through without opposition, but Il
this bill (refsrring to his owr) Ia defeated
II will have very hard road TO travel