The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1885-01-22
A NEW JUDGE.

For O few weeks past the members Of
| the Stark county Bar have been using
their efforts 10 secure the passage of O
bill allowing an additional Judge fol
this sub division OF the 9th Judicial Dis
triet, the subdivision including thu
counties OF Stark, Columbiana and Car
| roll. The docket OF the Stark county
| Common Pleas Court Is oyer'burdenet
| with cases and II 10 almost impossible
to reach q new case In lees than from
one 10 two years. This, OF course, do
lays justice.
This sub division 10 one OF the mos
populous In the State, ranking fourth
In voting population, 1854, Of which
Stark county has nearly 10000, and the
three counties have only two Judges.
BY carefully noting the following
comparisons with other districts In the
State our friends will SOC that the allow
ance Of only two Judges In this sub
division 10 hardly a fair proportion.
For instance: The first subdivision q
the lth District has voting population
OF 8 ,2sb; or less than 1000 more than our
own district. and has aye Judges. The
Ord subdivision OF the same district
with about the same population az the
Grst, has ak judges. The Ord sub-divl.
sion OF the 9th District has q population
of S2,083 or only 400 m,re voters
than our own district and has four
Judges. The aad subdivision OF the Same
district with only 1900 voters or
only two-thirds the population OF this
district, and has three Judges. While In
the and subdivision OF tho 2Dd Judicial
District with q voting population Of 10,
725 being 40 less than the population
OF Stark county a%lone-thoy have two
Judges.
In the Bed sub division OF the End Ju.
dicial District, with a population Of 80
972, only 800 more than this District,
they have four Judges.
We might 40 on aud show many more
discrepancies between this ard other
districts.
The average throughout tho State 10
one Judge for 1870 votes, and accord
Ing to this We should have three Judgee
In this district.
II 10 well known that the longer q
cave "hangS Gre" In court through "the
laws delay" II Ia moro expensive 10 The
litlgAnts, while II casoc can DO reached
and tried soon after their commence.
ment. the costs are less.
+ We hope our Legislature will care.
fully consider tho matter and pass the
law allowing us another Judge. The
matter will DO one OF economy In the
end, and the additional expense will
certainly DO small considering the 70.
suit. The new Circuit Court will be OF
no particular help 10 us In this county,
as during the past year Judge pehco
was only away on the District Bench
about ten days, and that was during the
January vacation.
Again, the work OF the Common Pleas
Court In this county Is worry h%oavt-our
court having been In session last year
Soma tan month";.
Judge Poase Ia 4 hard worker and
pushes the business as fast "A the crowd.
ed state Of tho Dockets will permit,
but 10 compel ono man 10 preside for
ten months or more out OF every year,
seems 10 US like riding o willing horse
10 death. The members OF the bar feel
that Judge PeAss should have m assist
ant. They know, too, their clients In.
t%erostS, al we'll as that OF the public
generally, will DO benefited by the ad.
dition Of another Judge.
We hope the Legislature will give us
the Judge, as they should, and aid tho
Court and Bar Of this county 10 push
the wheels Of justice along with greater
speed. We say, give us tho additional
Judge.
@.---s-------~----