The Waterbury Democrat., 1934-11-27


 Waterbury exists at the present time. Following last nights public hearing on the subject before the aldermen, at which arguments for and against the setting up of the court were delivered, it was voted byr the board to defer any further action pending the drawing up of an ordinance setting up the tri- bunal. Opinions expressed inform ally by the aldermen indicated majority of them opposed to the plan.
 Judge Philip Troup of New Ha- ven, William J. Pape, Samuel Kramer, Attorney William Hen- nessey, William M. Harris of the Mutual Aid, L. s. Fitch, c. J. Bart lett, D. D. Ford, Frank Hess, Lew is A. Walsh. Charles H. Chapman, A. l.. Davis, Leroy M. Gibbs and Robert Lowell all registered in fa- vor of the court while the principal objections were voiced by Attor- neys F. c. Bauby, William P. Wer- theimer, Edward F. Sweeney and { Arthur I. Cook, with Attorney John Whalen stating that while he is neither in favor or against the set ting up of the court he feels more study should be given the matter before definite action is taken one way or the other.
 Clash Features
 The features of the hearing was a clash between Attorney Bauby and MT. Fitch, the latter being prominent in the handling of cred it adjustments in the city. Attorney Bauby asked him if he didn't con- duct several collection agencies the names of which he changed from time to time when he became too we'll known. Attorney Bauby also referred to the names of the agencies as aliases" MT. Fitch re- piled that he conducts the Account Service bureau, is an officer of the Waterbury association of Credit Men, member of the federal code authority governing credit men and an officer of the Building Supplies Dealers group.
 Mr. Fitch appealed to President Peter Griffin from further cross examination at the hands of Attor- ney Bauby and was granted such exemption only to be attacked by the lawyer when the Iatter made formal statement of opposition to- the board. The general fleeing among the lawyers was that the small claims court would function only as a cheap collection center for the collection agenies. He said:
 eThese so-called collection agen- cies are represented by MT. Fitch. When the name of one gets too well known he switches to a new name. I've seen letters sent out signed by L. s. Fitch, counsellor +r4A fnn in fact. He should be prosecuted for that because it's illegal. Appar- ently nobody wants to take the in- itiative.'
 Attorney Bauby and others also during the hearing differed with Judge Troup on some of his state msnts.
 Mir. Harris Speaks
 MT. Harris was the first speaker insbehalf of the court. He pointed that there are 1,S00 on the relief rolls under him who are merely getting enough to get along. How ever, the workers are being con- stantly bothered by creditors. Therefore, he said, he feels that if the cases could be brought into the small claims court and disposed of. He cited one case where the amount involved is small and the worker, to get fair justice, would have to pay big sum to take the case into court under the present procedure. Under the small claims court he argued the case could be ended quickly and justice meted out.
 Asked by Attorney George Guil- foile if the man owing money rxfr hi to one creditor if the case was tried in. the small claims court or to a dozen of his creditors, MT. Harris said that each creditor would have fostake a given amount each week. ssCf course he installment fel- lows would get their claims first. They're good salesmen and they're good collectors he said. Asked if ninety-eight of the Waterbury lawyers haven't treated the peo- pie fair in the matter of attach 1nents for small debts, MT. Harris replied in the affirmative.
 tI have a very good word for the lawyers of Waterbury. They have been more than fair. I've seen lawyers throw up cases rather than attach some of the men," he added.
 Would Reduce Costs
 Mr. Kramer declared that the small claims court would be ben eft both to the debtor and cred itor. He cited cases of men getting jobs after periods of unemploy- ment and then losing them be- cajlse of attachments pouring in on their pay. The small claims court, he. said, would tend to stop this. MF. Davis stated that the estab- lishment of the court would re- duce the cost of settling small claims and would speed up Jus-' tice.
 MT. Pape pointed out that the small claims court would cause the settlement of bills amicably and quickly. It would tend to bf4ng the debtor and collector to- gether, he said. He added that in his firm they practically run a small claims court, pointing out when an employees pay is at- taGhed they call in the creditor and arrive at a weekly settlement Of the amount due. He also said that pjersons would be quicker to pay small bills under the small claims court system. He explained that a person would rather pay a bill of S1O than have his name published.
 Exemption Debated
 Alderman Joseph Wilhelm asked Afr. Pape if it is so that once a 5s1an is brought before the small x1aims court he couldn't have his uay factorized for less than $10O. MF. Pape said he was not sure but he believed that this was the rule. Attorney Guilfoile then asked if it isn't so that every landlord 1n1the city is owed back rent. MT. B|ape replied in affirmative. He inti- &1ated that such exemption for the debtor would injure the landlords. Ho also hinted that double- EE|freled court would be necessary