The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-12-29
OPINIONS OF LAWYERS
In GensrA They Warmly Approve OF the
Plan n Exprsss the Hope That
he Legislature WIN Take
the Necessary Stops.

rapidly and has increased so during the
past few years that II Is impossible for
two judges to handle 1t without work.
ing themselves to death In An effort to
do SO. The great % Of work re-
quired of the judges here is made strik-
ingly evident by a comparison of the
work of Judge Lindsay's department
alone. with the work OF both depart
menes of the court in Helena:
Since Jan. I, 1898, tried In Helena 1sS
/ cases.
Since Feb. 1. 1898. Judge Lindsay tried
231 cases.
During that period Judge Lindsay
also disposed of the following:
Divorces granted ....... ............. 80
Cases referred to referee N reports
receiVeu.. 80. II
Natural1zed ........... 1890. ........56
Insanity commitments .............. &c
Probate orders made. actual orders. 59s
Passed upon motions and demurrers SOC
The clerk of department one, r.. +.
Leonard, has written 5ss journal pages.
The foregoing is not all of the judges
work by any means. and some of the
matters not enumerated consume more
time than the trial Of cases, for instance
the hearing upon injunctions. one alone
OF which matters occupied that depart
ment for two weeks.
The figures for Judge Clancy's de-
partment are not at hand, but he also
disposed of almost II not altogether
as many cases as the two judges in
| Helena.
The plan which seems the most pop
ular with the attorneys. and one that
would practically add no expense to
the taxpayers. IL il would not in fact,
make a saving for them, is that one
judge should attend to all criminal bus
mess. and mother have all civil cases
requiring a trial by jury, while the
| third unnld taEa oil aa..ttxy and nra
bate matters. insanity hearings. d.
vorces. ETC., n all civil cases in which
the parties ~stipulate to waive a jury
trial. BY this panel no additional jury
would be required and. 1t is believed,
the panel of the other departments
could be reduced and in the end an
extra judge would become a matter of
economy and a saving to the taxpayers.
A number of attorneys have been in
terviewed on the proposition of in
creasing the number of judges and they
are almost unanimously in favor OF
ID.
John +. Forbis said: There is GER
tainly enough business In this district
for three judges. and we should by all
means have that number / do not ia
vor the plan of calling. in a judge from
an outside district. That would never
work satisfactorily. He could not come
at the proper time. He could not say
'O'e Coe oho II NOhio pt litlpo~Sl-
BILE to arrange the business with any
system. Then. too. a judge from an
other district would not understand the
circumstances here. and the people
should have a voice in the selection of
their own judges. Nor would the plan
be economical. for it would necessitate
at times a third jury. and the Jury is
the principal element of cost in running
a court. 1 would have a third judge,
but IL would cost us no more than at
present, for ' would have a provision
made i'm the law that only two juries
should ever be impaneled. One de-
partment hould attend to the criminal
business alone and another department
could be given the probate. insanity and
equity cases. All default hearings
should be conducted in that depart
ment. and cases wherein parties stipu-
late to waive a jury might be tried
there. No jury would be needed for
that department. 1t would be practical
ly no extra work for the clerks or sher-
IFS office. and IL woul consequently
cost us only the salary of the Judge.
which is insignificant. That would
leave the other department for the trial
of civil causes with a jury. The salary
of the extra judge would be more than
saved I'm many ways. For Instance. in
the cost of OBTAINING witnesses in Grim
n cases for a considerable length Of
NAtl's ds u " ntttSfdIl.
should be brought to trial as soon as
possible after they are at issue. In rhis
way only can the ends of justice be
subserved. We have business here srr
three judges. and we should by all
means have them"
Thompson Campbell said: You may
quote me as saying emphatically that
IL the constitution permits II. I favor a
third judge. ! believe that the criminal
work in this county Is enough for one
judge, and there Is certainly too much
work in Judge Lindsayis department
now for any one judge to attend to.
The extra work imposed upon him. and
the civil business that is now sent to
department 2. are amply sufficient TO
keep another judge busy, and We GER
| tainly should have him"
w. f. Carroll said: Another depart
ment of the court is im~perativeby need
ed. Both OF he present judges are
overcrowded. n in many instances
within my personal knowledge cases
that nave been ready for trial for near
ly three years have not yet been reach
ed. The additional cost would be prac-
tically only the salary of the judge.
SO. 500 per year. which would be paid by
the state. and as Silver Bow county
now pays into the state a great ropor
ton of its emu IL would only be fair
that this district have an additional
department.. Wnen tnere u sucn a cry
ing need for IT,"
Judge Dewolfe said: I'VE should
have a law enacted by the next legis-
lature that o grant us a third
Judge. There Il business enough In this
county for three judges. OF course I
would give them all concurrent juris-
diction. with the power in the judges 20
parcel the business of the court among
the different departments so as to make
the work as nearly equal as possible.
and with the right also In a majority
Of the judges to transfer causes from
one department to another"
George b. Dygert said: Il heartily in
dorse the plan suggested by Mr.. Jonn
r. Forbis. We should have three judges
In this district. There is work enough
for them. and justice can only be lone
In hat
J.. X. Macdonald said: I'm reply TO
your question as to hat We should do
10 relieve the conge~ted condition of