The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-08-06

tlluk I0db JuukC StVnC was ht6at sa. claiming that the distinction between equity and law courts was not well founded. It is a distinction laid down by Blackstone, and is not well found- ed in reason. You want the court to dispense justice between man and man and to enforce criminal laws for the protection of society. and that is the end of 1t. and to Indulge in technicah- ties, and throwing cases out Of equity courts. because it Is supposed that remedy exists at law or throwing cases out of a lower court because the rem edy is of equity. all that is technical and expensive, and has no place In common sense. if you will allow the expression. Now I asked my friend from Russell to make this motion. be- cause did not do 1t in time. and nav ing voted with the minority. could not. and the vote was so close l wanted to give another opportunity to the deie- gates in this Convention. to see If they would not abolish this unneces- sary part of our judicial system. and, sir. I do not wish to unnecessarily fon- surne the time of the Convention atall. believing that the question Is fair- lv presented to the Convention. Now ask for the motion to be put for re- consideration.
 MT. Graham (Talladegal-I voted for the amendment suggested on last Sat urday and I desire to submit few remarks on this question. did not make many pledges before coming to this Conve ntion, but among them was one in favor of the abolition of Chan cery Courts in this State. and consoli- dating their work with Circuit Courts. and among my people. 1t was exceed ingiy popular not because of any lack of confidence In these courts as they exist, but because the people believed them to be unnecessary. I live Tn chancery division. and in a circuit division, where in five counties the work of the chancellor has been prsc- tically done away with. In fact the business is done more expeditiously in the city or county courts. established in that division. In my county, sate from recollection and I think 1t IS cor rect, there is only one case an the chsncery docket of that division and that case commenced in the year 1872. This is also evidence of the fact that the Charcery Court had better be turned into the City Court or s',ine cher court in that county. In the Seventh Judicial Circuit, the work of the Circuit Judge has practically been taken away from him in four conI ies, oat of SIX. These things show the peo- pie that either the Circuit Court or the Chancery Court is unnecessary. # we are going to maintain and BUS tain these inferiour courts. I am rot dis posed to quarrel with the Con ,ntion, or with the Judiciary Committee in making it possible for many more courts to be established in this State, but l suggest that the people will be able to see whether these courts are necessary. Along the line of reform, along the line of expediency, and policy, and along the line of subjecting the people to as little expense as is possible, in the administration of the courts of this country, I cali this Con- vention to halt and to put the chancery Jurisdiction along with the circuit jurisdiction. or the jurisdiction of inc inferior court. and thus relieve the peo- pie of this burden. speak seriously when I say that the prospect in this State Is not the best for economy, in our court system, because we are opening wide the doors and all mem- bers of my profession are not any too busy in looking after their private. practice, and I fear that great many will become too busy in looking after the creation of positions to which they may aspire. Gentlemen let us be con- servative in this matter. believe this is the step in the right direction. I believe the people would approve it. know that they are willing for rs to have courts sufficient to carry on the business of the State expeditionsly and I want them to have them. but I fear that we are opening the opportunity for the crea tion of too many courts. There are some in existence in tkis State today, in counties where the tax values are less than two million dol- lars, and I have heard 1t said that jurors could not get their certificates caShed when they served for such courts, and still those counties are put to the expense of supporting a circuit judge. Gentlemen of the Convention, let us make a reform just at this point. It Is a quiet hour, and a mo- ment for serious reflection, and trust this Convention will consider this mat ter seriously and if after such con- sideration. you deem it wise and expe- dient. I hope you will reconsider the vote by which this was taken and let Us work a just reform in this State in the Judicial system.
 MT. deGra raffenreid-May ask a ques- tion? We had this system that you advocate In this State at one time. did we not?
 Mr. Graham (Tall dsga)-I do not re- member.
 MT. deGrafrenried-Is 1t not a fact that one term the Circuit Judge had Chancefy Jurisdiction. now I wanted to ask you If 1t was not a fact that the chancery cases were always put at Nhe heel of the docket, and as a rule not reached?
 MT. Graham (Talladega)-I will state was not in practice at that time. I understand 1t was way before the war. I will call on MT. deGraffenried to an- swer his question.
 Mir. deGraffenried-I have heard Judge Stone say in a speech before the Bar Association on this subject, that when they did have that system, chan cery cases were put at the heel of the docket. because the jurors were there and the judge was anxious to try cases that juries should try, so as to dispense with their services, and expense of keeping them there, and chancery cases as rule were not reached until Friday or Saturday, and everybody was tired, and as a result, chancery eases were continued from term to term and year to year, and in order to get rid of that trouble the law was changed and made as it exists today.
 MT GIahamvI would like to ask If even that would make a chancery case more tedious and slow than now.
 MT. deGraffenried-We do get rid of cases now.
 The President-The time of the of 1'alladega has expired.