The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1889-03-28
SOME OPINIONS
Why the jurisdiction OF the
County Court Should be
Diminished.
1t Will Be Cheaper for Litlgants
and More Satisfactory for
All Having Legal
Business.

STATEsMAN reporter yesterday at nal
hazard obtained the opinions of the
prominent lawyers mentioned below on the
bill now pending in the senate diminishing
the civil jurisdiction of the county court.
All of these lawyers without single ex-
ception favored the measure regardless of
who is or who may be Judge, and they
speak the sentiment of over nine-tenths of
the Austin bar.
w. D. Doom-"I have no prejudice in
the matter whatever. greatly prefer that
the change be made. 1t will be far better
for litigsnts and lawyers. Then, again, in
case of appeal the cases would go from
the district court to the supreme court,
whereas they go from the county court to
the court of appeals, which is organized
for criminal business. Again, the decis-
ions of the court of appeals in civil cases
are never published, but they would be in
the supreme court. 1 decidedly favor
transferring all the civil business to the
district court no matter who may be the
county Judge, because, in my opinion, it is
for the BEST"
N. A. Rector-"I favor the change be-
cause the district judges are better law
yers and more reliable in passing upon
deal to do looking after county affairs,
commissioners courts, schools and other
matters and cannot give that attention to
civil business he should. l am satisfied
the change will be for the best, and l
signed the petition asking the legislature
to pass the BILL"
Mr.. R. J. Hill said: ~ am in favor of
the change of jurisdiction
"First-because the number of courts
here often renders it difficult for members
of the bar to keep engagements.
"Second-Much litigation now thrown
into the county court is important, and
there is no probability of that court Civ
ipg the satisfaction to litigants which
could be obtained in the district court.
The fact that it Is a court of inferior
jurisdiction necessarily results this way.
"Third-More important than either of
these is the desirability of relieving the
court of appeals of our appeals in civil
cases. That oouvt has not the aid of the
commissioner of appeals as has the su-
preme court. believe all must admit
that the court of appeals is overworked.
"Fourth-I don't think the questions
arising in reference to the present in
cumbent ought to control. The legisla-
ture has granted the change asked else
where when generally desired by the bar,
and hope it will yet be done for u.s."
Mr.. George Pendexter said: 81 favor
the bill for the following reasons:
"First-I do not believe that the present
county judge has this requisite legal ability
or information to properly discharge the
duties of the office as regards the trial of
civil cases.
Second believe it would be to the
interest and convenience of litigants as
we'll as lawyers to have the civil business
of this county concentrated in one court
and thus avoid the conflict of engage
ments arising where two courts are in
session at the same time, as occurs under
existing laws.
"Third-The present legislature has
passed bill providing for four terms of
the district court in Travis county, which
will enable that court to try all civil cases
with as little delay as would occur should
the civil jurisdiction of the county court
be preserved"
Mr.. Albert S. Burleson gave the follow
ing reason for favoring the bill: 81 am
in favor of the bill diminishing the juris-
diction of the couaty court of Travis
county now before the senate, because
think it to the interest of litigants as we'll
as lawyers to have a speedy disposition of
their cases, and under existing circum-
stances this cannot be had. If the bill
should pass, business would be concenrt ated
in one court, and the annoyance of two
courts in session at the same time be
avoided"
A ;,,1- h.,
civil business should be taken from the
county court because it is far better, both
for litigants and the bar"
Mr.. Warren Moore: ~ favor it because
incompetency is more likely to creep into
the county court judgship than into the
district. A change will benefit litigants
and be more satisfactory to the bar"
Mr.. l.. d. Brooks: 81 have no personal
feeling in the matter whatever,b but think
it would be more satisfactory to have cases
tried IN the district court, and if appealed
they would go to the supreme court,
which, in civil matters, is the highest re-
sort and authority in the state"
Mr.. Dave Hewlett ssid 81 favor the
measure because it will be cheaper for
litigants and cheaper for the county, and
because it will expedite business and be
more satisfactory to the people and the
lawyers.
Judge u. I. Fillmore: ~ favor the bill.
l favored diminishing the jurisdiction of
the court when was judge, and 1 advo-
Gated it. l favor diminishing both the
civil and the criminal jurisdiction because
l believe it will be better for the county"
Judge OsceOla Archer: Il favor the
measure because it will be better to have
the business consolidated into one court"
ACCIDENTS" REVIEWED.