The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1902-07-15

80 - N
II is profitable to remember them. Now
among some lawyers il il really not con-
sldered an unprofessional act 10 solicit
employment. A person cannot receive in
these days a personal injury without be-
Ing the recipient OF offers of service from
sundry lawyers in bringing a damage
suit. I heard not many weeks ago OF a
certain person who had received an in
jury in a railroad accident. who had a
proposition OF disinterestcd service for
a division of the damages from seven
dlsinterostod attorneys. I think this is
going entirely too far and l know that
~ some communities it is bringing the
Bar CT North Carolina into public dis
IeIute. | think It bohooves this asso-
cation TO make : plain declaration on
TINS subject so that the people MAY know
tfat such conduct Is outside the true
srhoro Of a reputable lawyer. think
that No should take such action as Will
I'D, If possible, in the mitigation {. this
CYL. l believe that the evil is in large
measure due TO the too liberal construc-
ton which the Supreme court has placed
tIon the statute in respect TO bringing
actions in fOrma pauperis. That statute
Was never intended to multiply damage
suits and clog the dockets CT the State
with purely speculative litigation. Some
> vii q ~ y jIIC u ltI
anl sometimes suggest a suit upon owl
dence that is palpably insufficient, trust
ing that something may turn up during
the progress of the litigation. that viii
enable the plaintiff to win a verdict.
Neither the lawyers nor the plaintiff
take any risk in the matter. They simply
contribute their time to the suit which,
if not won, has cost them nothing to
fisate. These cases have, in many coun-
ties. imposes useless burdens upon the
officers Of the court. upon witnesses and
uron the judges, and they have interfcrcd
With and delayed the trial Of other ac-
lions. l would suggest that this asso-
ciation to the General Assem-
bly, tho propriety of amending the statute
in regard to actions in forma paupcris,
so as to avoid the evil Of which com
plant is made. As the law now stands
there is virtually an obligation resting
upon any clerk or judge. to whom APP
plication is made to bring suit with
out bond. to grant the application when
the plaintiff swcars that he has a good
cause Of action, or when a lawyer GER
titles that in his Judgment the plaintiff
has a good cause of action. The court
in two cases in the nth volumn of our
reports has construed the statute as |
have indicated. IN my judgment the
TX . " ilIIit liz Pun
poses of that statute to proper cases. I
think that properly applied the statute
is emincntly necessary and salutary, but
it has been and is being constantly
abused. | think the statute ought to be
so amended that leave to sue in forma
Fauperis can be obtainablc only from a
judge of the Superior court; that the ap-
plication for the order ought to contain
. summary Of the evidence upon which
the plaintiff bases his cause Of action,
duly certified by the plaintiff, and that
The allowance of the order ought to be
discretionary with the judge after due
consideration by him of the evidence
submitted, just as a grand jury finds or
refuses to find a true bill upon the owl
dence submitted by the State. l think.
that in order to prevent any injustice, a
refusal to grant the Ordcr by one judge
ought not to bar the plaintitf from pre-
scnting his application to another Judge.
So that any person desiring to bring an
action without giving security for costs
can apply to each of the sixteen judges
Of the State, if he SO desires. l think
a statute of this sort Will not interfere
With the assertion Of any legal right OF
action possessed by any person in the
State, but will in large measure do away
with the indi5criminate and improper use
of the statute. It seems to me that the
present obligatory nature of the statute
regulating this matter should be modi-
fed as have indicated in the interest
of public Justice. To cite a person to
court, to call upon him to defend a suit
, in which the plaintiff is under no obliga-
ton il respect to costs, to put him OF
: necessity to expense, to loss Of time and
to manifold inconvenience, is wrong and
especially 50 in those cases where the
plaintiff has no valid cause OF action
and he and his attorney are merely spec
: ulating on the chances of q verdict. This,
in my opinion, is contrary to all ideas OF
Justice and the proper regulation of
judicial procedure. heartily ommcn as
> | say, the law that allows persons with
| out means and without friends to bring
suits without giving a bond for costs, but
| suggest that the law be SO modified that
( some Judge must examine and approve
/ the plaintiffs cause of action before the
defendant shall be vcxed with a law
. suit. When the statute was passed the
speculative era of practicing law had
not then dawned in North Carolina, and
f the court which construed the statute
r literally did not dream of the coming
deluge of such litigation.
Among the reforms l have mentioned
t as having been obtained through the &C
t tive instrumcntality of this association
: is the recent increase of the Judicial
= districts of the State. In my opinion this
association ought to carry the reform
still further by urging upon the General
t Assembly the enactment of a law scpa-
| rating the State into two divisions, each
containing eight districts and and con
filming to each division the judges resid-
ing therein in respect to the successive
holding of the courts of each district.
+ This plan retains all tho advantages OF
the rotating system which are UNIVERSAL
ly conceded, and yet relieves the system
4 of most of its attendant inconvenience
@ A judge would hold the courts OF each
Q district only once in every four years ana
! yet would be at all times much nearer
his own home in case Of disaster or ca
lamity- There have been times IL recent
years when judges have had to sufler by