Grand Rapids herald. [volume] (Grand Rapids, Mich.) 1892-1959, 1893-04-18

opinion la regArsf % the siardisx CT the
sNPertofSeaft - the besi psoof Tsassit''e
TIE peiitions are the products OF craft,
cunning. deceit aud don nright lying.
Joha Patton. Defense.
John Pattoa-l signed the pstiilon ia
fAsox IL superior court because ] be
Isssed II the ceurt we're abolished il
wsaid DO neecss4T. 10 have another car
cult Judge.
IL is evident that Mr. Patton WAS de
eelved. No additional circuit Judge
would 10 necessary. Eyea II one were
NECESSARY the expense IL maintaining =
third circuit court would he lees than
Gee hall the cost II the superior court
Like the other gentleman he signed the
puuon before sequainting hinlse IL With
the facts- He dad not represent "a I'm
teliigeat sentiment' because be Was de
ceiyed a. 10 the true s,stu. VI the case
Wansy's plea
George p. Wanty- believe that there
should be q municipal court here. as
there is in almost every well regulated
city IT It's size In the United States
where the court business pertaining To
the municipality can he disposed 1t in
a more orderly aud satisfactory manper
than Ia the ordinary courts IL the state.
Before the superior court was e.iab-
lished complaints were made before all
Justices ii the pcace and prisoners were
bound over Ia the circuit court. where
nearly one third of its time WAS occu-
pied trying criminal cases. When the
change Was made il suspended the re
csrder court and took to the superior
court its former jurisdiction II city
criminal cases. relieving the circuit. If
the superior court was abolished and its
work done as efficiently as ii now il. We
would require recorders court, aud the
amount u work which would go To the
circuit would. in my opinion. make
necessary another court in one year.
which. think. would increase rather
than diminish the expense and give
less satisfactory service. II the expense
Il the superior court has Increased in
I~oportion as The HERALD says. that
can be- Investigated and rcc,iiied.
Mr.. Waniys opinion is the only one
In the LOT that attempts To justify the
maintenance 81 the court. He speaks
from n professional point Of view. and
naturally would favor "a plurality OF
courts. Still he is sincere and his opin.
ion Is entitled 10 just as much weight IA
that 81 any attorney whose interests are
affected by the existence or non exist
cnce Of the courts.
From these opinions II must be evi-
dent that the preponderance Vi proof IL
with THE HERALD.
These names are the names selected
from the thousands at random who know
what they want. and why" as appears
by The Democrat. by their own state
ments it appears that they were de-
ceived into signing the petitions without
knowing what and why"
The HERALD challenges The Demo
crat TO drop persons and politics To dis
cuss tho superior court. twill betreated
with every consideration in these col
umns SO long as ii confines itself To the
issue.
To fix the issue equarely The Demo
crat is challenged To prove:
That the superior court is a necessary
tribunal.
That il is conducted economically.
That its Rbolishment will be an injury
TO any public interest
That it ought not to be abolished.
Two Other signcrs.
W. w. HYDE signed the petition re-
monstrating against abolishing the
court. but the next day wrote 10 Char
lie Bender asking him 10 erase my name
After giving the matter consideration.
j could not see any especial reason why
the superior court should exist. | be-
lieve it should he abolished.
Roger w. Kutterfield-I do not think
tho anv.ortnr x,,nvt o.,trht IN h. ohOl.
ished. but il should be changed ]
would take away all the civil business Of
the court, and establish tribunal with
jurisdiction in street opening Cases. |
believe recorders court. which would
do all the legitimate business 81 the STU
perior court. could be maintained for