|
|
|
Mr. Archer, placing the salaries of the judges at $3, 500
instead of $4, 000.
Mr. Wilkinson moved to go into committee of the whole,
which motion gave rise to a desultory discussion, after
which it was disagreed to.
Mr. Mackubin then took the floor in reply to the argu-
ment of Mr. Archer on last evening. lie thought that
the facts on which the arguments of the gentleman were
based were much more fallacious than those of the advo-
cates of the majority report, as charged by the gentle-
man. Mr. M. reviewed the statements of Mr. Archer as
to the relative number of cases tried in the Court of
Appeals under the old and the new systems, and the
arguments of the latter in favor of an Independent Court
of Appeals, and also advocated a return to the three-judge
system. It was no experiment.
Mr. McKaig said if the proposition to have an independ-
ent Court of Appeals prevailed he should move to strike
out the four associate judges, and leave but one, and he
would contend for this on the same process of reasoning
by which his friends from Harford (Messrs. Archer and
Farnandis) arrived at the conclusion that the one-judge
system was preferable to the three-judge system. They
said it was cheaper, therefore one judge of the Court of
Appeals would be cheaper than five. [Laughter. ] Mr.
McK. then argued in favor of the three-judge system,
and maintained that under it there would be much less
necessity and occasion for carrying cases to the Appeal
Court.
Mr. Merrick said if the opponents of the three-judge
system had foreborne their assaults until the workings
of the system could have been fully developed, they would
have spared themselves the vain beatings against the air
which they had indulged in. They had conjured up ob-
jections which the friends of the system did not intend
should arise. The different opponents of this system had
made diverse objections which answered each other. Some
contended that the duties of the chief judges in the Ap-
peal Court would be so laborious that they would not have
time to attend to their circuit duties, and others con-
tended that the duties of the chief judges in the circuits
350
|
|
|
|
 |
