The Savannah morning news. (Savannah, Ga.) 1900-current, 1901-11-29
is AGAINST DIVISION
JUDGE NORWOOD DOES NOT AP-
PROVE CHANGES IN CITY CoURN
LAYS 1T ALL ON THE BAR.
LAWYERS AND NOT COURT, THE
JUDGE SAYS, RESPONSIBLE
FOR DELAYS.

at Interest-ThrOugh Lawyers
Delays Enough Time Has Been
Lost to Clear the Docket of Every
Case 1t COntains-PrOpOsed Bills
Would Create "A Judicial Tyranny
and Would Make the Conduct of
the Courts More Expensive.
While the City Court bills have been
attracting a good deal of attention
Judge Norwood has up to this time
had nothing to say. In expressing his
views yesterday on the proposed di-
vision of the court, he said that it is
not as judge that he opposes the bill;
the division, he said, would save him
from the performance of much judicial
labor he has been doing for the past
five years, but it is as taxpayer that
he makes his protest.
MY opinion of the BILL he said, sis
increase taxes, and to make the Sa-
vannah bar attend to their business,
and to inaugurate Legislative tyranny
1t provides that lawyers shall not be
permitted to continue their cases by
consent, and even if they consent, the
judge shall not permit it. That is tyr
amy, pure and simple. The oppoS-
ing lawyers might have the best of
reasons for desiring a continuance;
they might be considering an offer of
settlement; they might be trying a
case in another court, but the judge
20 f,fo
can make a legal showing for a con-
tinuance. This is making the lawyers
puppets, and the judge a tyrant.
Much has been said about the fire.
quent postponement of cases set for
trial. This is a matter that does not
affect the public, or the taxpayer
when the attorneys give notice of their
decision to postpone. in time for the
jury to be called off. There is no
charge on the public by postpone
tween the lawyers and their clients.
Any lawyer who wants to try his
cases has nothing to do. except to re-
fuse his consent to postpone. 1t only
requires the firmnesS to say no. The
judge has nothing to say in the mat
ter, and yet, he is censured because
trials are postponed. All the judge de-
sires is to be informed in time of the
postponement, to save the county the
expense of having the jurors come to
do nothing. Very soon after I was
appointed judge, l adopted a rule to
require the attorneys in a case set for
trial. to give notice of postponement
in time to publish notice to the jury.
The taxpayer is a party to every suit,
and my intention was to protect him
from useless expense.
Under that rule, notice calling off
juries was given in the Morning News
313 times in 1901. The number of jur-
rors averages q a day. Nearly 81, 900
was thus saved in jury fees. But the
313 did not include all the days when
cases were postponed by consent, for,
in many instances, the notices to the
jury covered two and three days, and
often the judge gave the jurors notice
from the bench not to appear BY a
strict count from the docket the days
thus lost are 412, and the amount saved
to the county is about $22,24S.
Judge NOrwOOd's Duties.
During the five years and ten
months l have been on the bench /
have not lost a week from sickness,
nor over three weeks altogether. The
court sits about ten months of each
year. Friday is taken up with GRIM
inal business and hearing motions; Sat
urdays there are no jury trials; so
that five days each week the court is
in session, trying, or to try. cases.
Four days each week is for the jury
in civil cases. Four days each week,
in ten months, make 176 jury days
each year; thus 4t2 divided by 176,
gives two years and sixty days lost
for the trial of jury cases on postpon-
ments. There are not over 800 jury
cases on the docket now. Thus il APP
pears that sufficient time has been
lost by consent postponements to have
tried each case now on the docket
allowing more than a day and a half
to each one.
'If censure for these postponements
is just, who Is to blame, the judge or
the attorneys? Who is the best judge
of the reasons moving attorneys to
postpone-they or the judge? Who is
interested in the trial, except the at
torneys and their clients? No one
except the taxpayer. If he be pro-
tected, whence the necessity to legis-
late in order to forbid lawyers from
putting off trials that do not concern
the publics pocket? l do not believe
that such a bill was ever thought of
before in the history of civilization
a bill to take away from the lawyers
the power to consent to put off case,
and to forbid the judge to permit a
case to be continued or postponed for
a day, even when the attorneys unite
in an appeal to grant their request. II
would be well for the Judiciary Com
mittees of the Senate and House tc
consider the question. whether the Leg
islature can single out one court from
many in the state. and declare that
attorneys who practice in that court
shall be deprived of the right to post
pone or continue case at will with
the judges assent. or that the Judge OF
that court shall not have the power
or discretion to postpone any case when
the attorneys so request. II that
would not be an invasion Of the judi
ciary department by the legislative
and tyranny outright. IL is difficult 10
conceive any legislation that would be-
Courts are established 10 administer
justice. and many situations can exist
under which gross injustice would be
done were a judge 20 force parties 20
trial. unless one could show strict
legal ground for a continuance, when
both request A..
The Assignment Of Cases.
Another rule adopted was 10
permit attorneys TO assign cases by
consent They can assign for any day
IA the current term, or M the next term
Of the court. I DO not know Of any Oth-
~ judge who has ever favored the bar
with 40 liberal "a practice. Ia a meet p
ing ~ fhe Savannah bar called BY me
40 suggest rules % practice 90 suit
themselves. this rule wac approved.