The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1898-03-01

This morning a committee represent
ing the Lackawanna bar will go to
Washington to appear before the sub
committee of the house judiciary COM
mittee which has under consideration
the bill introduced by Hon. William
Connell providing for a central federal
judicial district in Pennsylvania.
The committee will consist of Judge
r. w. Archibald, +. w. Fleitz, Major
r. +. Penman, J. II. Torrey and George
NJ. Watson. 1t has been arranged to
give the Lackawanna men hearing
before the Subcommittee at 1890 We'd
nesday morning.
1t is probable that short addresses
will be made by each member of the
committee. They will urge that a new
district would be a great convenience
to a large percentage of the people of
Pennsylvania and that it could be Gre
ated and maintained without placing
any additional burden on the govern
ment from the fact that the amount
now paid for carrying jurors, court
officials and prisoners to and from the
various parts of the widely scattered
district where the court now sits in
addition to what like expenses there
would be in smaller districts would be
sufficient to pay the ordinary expenses
of a new court.
The Lackawanna men will go well
fortified with facts and figures showing
the necessity of the new district. Judge
Archibald will make the principal ar
gument In part it will be as follows;
THE JUDGES ARGUMENT.
This movement for new district is by
no means recent. The need for it has
been recognized and agitated for full"
twenty years. | cannot give the exact
history of it, but 1t began at least as jar
back as the forty-third congress when
o bill was introduced in the mouse hy
Hon. l.. ID. Shoemaker, of Wilkes-Barre,
substantially like the one now aske1 for.
|" was again brought forward by Hon
j y. Scranton, of Scranton, in the for
ty seventh cons ress, and still again ny
| Hon. H. G. Mccormick, of Williamsport.
| 1hL injustice of con pelling one-thir1 nt
| the Ieople of lhe state of Pennsylvania
4 to chase after theL' legal rights in the
| United States courts as heretofore con-
| stituted is what has prompted each Of
| these efforts and they are not likely to
| cease until they have been satisfied.
| They have been met from time to time
| by various objections at which l shall
| only hint by saying that the making of
| the marshal and the district attorney
| salaried officers has removed some of
! them. The partial relief afforded by
| providing for sittings of the court at
| different places, and particularly that
| of the act of 1886 giving a sitting of the
| court at Scranton, has probably stood TO
| Il considerable degree in the way of the
| larger relief to which the people are
| entitled. We respectfully submit that
| halfway measures such as these should
l
plete justice.
| The total population of Pennsylvania
| by the census of 1890 was 5.25S, Ola. That
| of New York is but 10000 greater, and
| yet she has three districts where we have
| but two. The population of the proposed
district is 1,596,65S This includes some
| counties which are not named In the
bill but which should in my Judgment
be brought by amendment into it. The
| lines of the district as / think they
ought to be are marked in blue upon
the map which accompanies this brief
The Eastern district would then be left
with 1,S52, POP and the Western with 1907
l5i making a very fair and equal divi
sion of the state between the three.
SOME COMPARISONS.
The population of the proposed distric
| is greater than that of Maine. New Jer
sey, Maryland South Carolina Mime
kansas, Mississippi, Louisiana or Cali
fornia, to say nothing of the states whicl
| are smaller than these; and ii is almos
as large as that of Virginia, North Caro-
lima, Georgia, Wisconsin, Iowa, Kentuck.
or Tennessee. OF these states Tennes
see and Alabama have three district
each and there are two districts eacl
in Arkansas. Georgia, Mississippi, Nortl
| Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia ant
Wisconsin. Tne state of Florida whicl
had at the census but 39l, ,422 people
about one-twefth of = ennsylvania AM
one-ffth the number in the proposed dis
trict, is divided into two districts. TIL
great inequality of court privileges 4
Pennsylvania compared with the other
mentioned in this showing is manifest,
Whether the privileges provided by lay
: are sufficient as to the other places d
not know, but so far we have had court
; but once a year in Scranton, not ! ven
ture to say because we have not ha
! business for them, but because as | be
) lieve of the demands in other direction!
: The records of the court and the res
seat of it are at Pttsburg, and inter
, mediate between the sitting of the coul
elsewhere if there is any occasion I
I ! seek the Judge of the district we hav
{ | to go there to find him. TIE distanC
from Scranton and WillSes-Barre-an
| | refer to these cities as an illustrf
, | tion because the counties immediatel
]
= lion of people-is about $50 miles, and
takes from twelve to fourteen hours
travel it. This represents the difficultit
we have to surmount in seeking feeders
justice except at the rare opportunitiC
we get once year when the court col
venes at Scranton or Williamsport.
: AN ADDITIONAL BURDEN.
5 The bankruptcy law, which it is hope
d that congress will pass at this Sc
k sion, will also be fruitful in business Il
the federal courts, and in the very actiN
G commercial centers included in the ne
d district will add materially to the wol
S to be disposed of by the court Not
l. ing can be said more definitely tina
l. this with regard to 1t, but the resul
l. seem self-eVident.
n Witnin the last few years by the esta
lishment of the circuit court of appea
= in each circuit, the circuit and distri
judges have had new and important d
!, ties TO attend to. In consequence of III
o by the bill which established these a
q pellate courts a number of addition
X circuit judges were provided for, and
\ the last report of Attorney General NJ
y Kenna he points out the crying necc