Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1896-12-31
OUR COLONIAL And
STATE JUDICIARY.
Confined from second page,

Oh'pot dppDintou ~ uHuHt ibls
TIT; Col. John 'Frcncb, appoinicdl
July 25th. l720; David Evans, ap-
pointed April Goth, 1T27: DIR. Samue
Chew, appointed -, 174l; William
Till, appointed -, l7d3; Ryyes Holt,
appointed October 26th, 1745; John
vining, appointed October Both, 176l /;
Richard McWilliams, appointed Octo-
Dor 30th, 1773. =
Chief Justices OF Delaware under
Constitution Of William Killen,
appointed june 9th, 1777.
Chief Justices of the Supreme Court
under Constitution of 17g2 George
Read, appointed September Both, 1893;
kensey Johns, ST., appointed January
3D.. 1899; Samuel M. Harrington, APP
pointed October 10th. 1890 80
Chief Justices of the court of COM
mon pleas under Constitution OF 1892.
Richard Bassett. appointed September
9th, 1888; James Booth, ST.. appointed
January 2Sth, 1893; Thomas Clayton,
appointed February Sth, 1928.
Chief Justices of Delaware under
Constitution OF 1881 Thomas Clayton,
appointed January 18th, 1882; John
M. Clayton. appointed January 10th,
1887; Richard Ii. Bayard, appointed
September 10th, 1889; James Booth,
Jr., appointed March l2th, 1871 /;
Samuel M. Harrington appointed
April 3D.. 1855; Edward ". Gilpin,
appointed May 9th, 1857; Joseph l..
Comegys, appointed May 18th, 1876 .
Alfred p. Robinson, appointed Janu-
airy Goth, 1893; Charles b. Lore, APP
pointed March 2lst, 1893.
Associate Judges of Delaware under
Constitution Of lS31--James II. Black,
al
M. Harrington. appointed January
January 18th, 1892: Caleb S. Layton,
appointed June 3D.. 1886: John j. Mill.
gan, appointed September 10th, 1899 /;
David Hazard, appointed December
10th. 1874; Edward Wootten. appointed
September 9th, 1S47; John w. hous-
ton, appointed May dth, 1855; Leonard
Il. Wales, appointed September I'd,
1864: William G.. Whiteley, appointed
March 3lst, 1884; Ignatius Q. Grub,
appointed May 25th, 1856; John II.
Paynter, appointed March 25th. 1887 /;
:. Charles NJ. Cullen, appointed August
2Sth, 1890; David 4. Marvel, APP
pointed February lst, 1893.
Chancellors of Delaware under Con-
stitution OF 1792-William Killen, ap-
pointed October -, 1888; Nicholas
Ridgely. appointed December =, 1901 /;
Kensey Johns. ST., appointed June
2lst, 1880.
Chancellors of Delaware under Con-
stitution of lS3l-Kensey Johns, Jr.,
appointed January 18th, 1882; Samuel
M. Harrington, appointed May 4th,
1857; Daniel Moore Bates. appointed
december 18th, 1865; Willard Sauls-
bury, appointed November l4th, 1873;
james L. Wolcott, appointed May 9th,
1899; John X. Nicholson, appointed
September =, 1895.
Law reporters Hon. Samuel M. Har-
rington, 1S32-lS55; Hon. John w.
Houston. lS55-1S93; Hon. David II.
Marvel, 1893.
Chancery reporters Hon. Daniel NJ.
Bates, lSI4-1 1873: Hon, Willard Sauls-
bury, 1873. 1892 Hon. James Ii; VOL
colt. ls92-ls95; Hon. John n. Nichol-
son, 1895. E
The review of our entire judicial
history, certainly from the Duke of
Works timea will show that our courts
of common law jurisdiction and pro-
ceuure, have continuously been consti
tuted upon. at the least, three judge
and mover q one, or even two Judge
basis. DuriEg the present century, aud
particularly under the present judicial
orgaliZation, opponents OF the three
judge system have arisen and iabored,
at various times, to shave substituted
in it's etead either one Judge or two
Judge plan. These movements have
been initiated or promoted by some
who were inspired by partisan or per
sonal motives, by others who were more
theoretical than practical. and by many
public spirited citizens animated by AN
earnest desire to make the administra-
tion Of justice In this State as efficient
as possible. Hitherto all these move
ments have signaliy failed. and, doubt
less, because very important considera.
tions were overlooked or disregarded.
In effecting changes OF our judicial
system, certain essential considerations
must constantly be borne in mind. In
tine first place, those undertaking such
innovations should have adequate
knowledge OF the existing system and
its practical operati q. They should
also have SIMILAR knowledge of the con
dition, views, habits, interests. means and
needs Of tho various classes OF people in
all parts Of our State, and should
especially remember that the polity
established in other, and particularly
larger States may be utterly unsuited
10 our conditions, resources and re-
guirements =
Again, it is manifest that there
should be no change where none. is
really needed; nor where the existing
system affords greater advantages and
is liable to fewer material objections
than will result from the adoption ,oi
any proposed substitute. Above all, an
entire system should not 10 abolished,
cspecially where it has been tried and
approved by many years Of experience,
when the defect may he remedietl
simply by it's Improvement in some
minor respect. y -
1t should also be observed that the
best of systems is ever subject 10 the
natural iniirmities of the human To-
strumentalities required for their pra6,
teal administration. The etliciencysoI
the best judicial system, his we'll as :oi
the most perfect machine, may be i'm
paired or destroyed by those whose
duty it is to operate it. 80 that in such
case, it is not tho system, or machine,
which is to be discarded, but those
who are unqualified, or otherwise unti
to have charge of II. 20 remove The
personnel of a bench it is not necessiiry
to discard The existing judicial system.
For, upon then adoption of III nov
Constitutions, even IF that system be-
left wholly unchanged, tho tenure Of
the existing judges would, ipso faoto,
be instantly terminated, unless proyi.