Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1896-12-31

lubluu anu JUDICIAL aDuHfueHh, III VIII
most probably be in New Castlr county
alone. How best provide for tbia prob
able neod is the problem 10 DO solved
by our present Constitutional Conven-
tion.
The provision for this purpose which
was favorably considered a few years
ago. as | have stated, was as follows
Retain the three-judge system In each
county as now constituted. Create a
ono.judge court for New Castle county
alone, on account of it's rapidly increas
ing population and business. Give said
court coordinate juriHdiction with the
superior court, except as to ESPECIALLY
reserved classes of Cases and Proceed
ings. a How the cases in this court to
be reviewed Oh error in the superior
court in and for New Castle county,
whose decisionn thereon shall be final.
Provide that this coordinate Judge
shall sit In the court of errors and ap-
peals on writs OF error to the superior
court OF every county, and that none Of
the Judges who sat below shall sit
above in error. This will make the
court sitting on error TO said superior
court, TO consist OF the Chancellor,
presiding, the resident Associate Judge
WIN did not sit below. and said CO.
ordinate Judge who cannot sit in the
superior court. AS the Chief Justice
will not under this plan, sit in the
court OF errors and appeals on error to
the superior court, he will not then DO
IN the incongruous position OF eitting
therein in a subordinate relation to the
Chancellor, but will preside. ps now,
over the court OF errors and appeals on
appeals from the Chancellor.
Ii this modification should he
adopted. it will secure for New Castle
county the advantages of both three
Judge and one judge court where alone
it is earnestly desired or needed. 1t
will also supply the demand for dis
tinct court OF errors and appeals separ-
ate from thesuperior court. 1t will fur
ther enable us to have equity kept
separate from law jurisdiction. and
all at no more expense than an AIDE
quate one-judge system combined with
separate court Of errors and appeals,
and probably with fewer Judges and
less expense in the end.
The coordinate Judge may also be
given, il deemed advisable, juristlic-
tion of criminal cases co ordinate with
the court of general sessions, &C., in
ANuN SuSiio GounN1. ilS may diSU bB
authorize to have jurisdiction Ia equity
throughout the State. of ull such causes
and proceedings as the Chancellor may
commit tn him, or where the Chancellor
from sickness, absence, or any other
cause, is unable or disqualified to sit.
The dignity and Importance which
would thus be given TO the office OF CO.
ordinate Judge, with the salary which
ha ahr ,etl Ia. ait,n
inaDd, as it should. the services of u
lawyer OF the highest ability and OK
perience at the bar. Such n court
would also relieve the superior court
of much business which is now i'm.
properly imposed upon it and, as time
advances and the population and
transactions of our people ipureafe,
give the superior court and ita Judges
far more time for attention to the more
important cases and queRtions demand
ing the laborious Investigation and
mature consideration of its Judges both
in New Castle county and through
out the State. is
In view OF all thatI have stated, and
of far moro that may be said, can il bio
reasonably believed that the one Judge
system is superior 10 tho three.J udge
system9 To SO argue. 10 to contend
| that the one-J Judge lie the stronger
court, and'the three,J Judge the weaker
one. II this no 60, then ought not its
advocates, il consistent, to insist that
the appellate court should consist of
one Judge and the court appealed
| from of three? FL.
Both the one and the two-J Judge
systems are strongest above and weakest
below. Therefore the fatal error of
their advocates has always been that,
in Delaware, they propose to make the
bench strongest where it is of least
use and weakest where it Is most
needed. Where they demand an entirely
distinct appellate court, they,would
compel the entire neopie of this State
to pay much for what they least need.
Where they would have the appellate
court composed of the resident Judge
Of the ono Judge court in each county,
they would greatly weaken the former.
For each of the said Judges in Kent
and Sussex would have but about four
weeks per year, of actual sorvice and
experience in their respective county
courts. This want of greater service
and experience would be prejudiciaI to
their efficiency in the appellate courr,
us we'll as elsewhere.
In this respect the present system
whereby each Of said Judges sits out.
side of his own county, and especially
in conducting the extensive and various
judicial business of the courts in New
Castle county, Is both more beneficial
and more satisfactory 10 each of said
Judges. 1t thus enables them to
strengthen, and not weaken, the present
appellate court. 81.
BY sitting in the courts OF New
Castle county, Instead Of It's resident
Judge, they enable. the latter TO attend,
whilst said courts are in session, to the
orphans court and other various Judi
cial business which is of far greater
volume in said county than in Kent
and Sussex counties; and alsu to give
more thorough investigation and con.
aideration to questions In the court OF
errors and appeals,
In other respects both the one.J udge
and the two-J udge courts are inferior
TO tho three-J Judge plan. 1t ia true that
they have been adopted by both tho
Federal government and many of. the
large States. But in these the adoption
OF the three-J Judge system would be far
too costly; whilst, in Delaware. under
our existing system each county has q
three Judge court which promptly dis
patches all its judicial business, and
without additional expense to the
public. lMi.
The claim that the sole responsibility
of the single-J Judge court would secure
ura anI tnrraatuaus opI tbara