judge could not go from one end to another in
twelve hours? The gentleman may talk of gen-
eralities, and about the business being postpon-
ed and put off. But where is the evidence of
it? Let him exhibit the proofs of his charge,
It is fashionable in our day to denounce judges.
Mr. BOWIE, The gentleman will allow me
to say that the very reason I complained of his
statistics, was that they did not show that a
large amount or Business had been continued
from term to term. I spoke of my own know-
ledge, within my own district, in reference to
the continuance of causes. I appeal to the gen-
tleman and ask him, to say if causes have not
been continued in his district?
Mr. CRISFIELD, That causes have been con-
tinued is true. We all admit it and know it. I
doubt not it is so in the gentleman's district, and
it may be that causes have been continued in
his district for the reasons he has assigned; but
I should like to have the proof. I do not doubt
that the gentleman's opinions are honestly en-
tertained, but I think he is mistaken as to the
facts. I do not believe causes have been con-
tinued to any great extent or habitually, be-
cause the judges would not stay to hear them.
I do not know that I. can say that I have not
helped to delay causes within the range of my
own practice. I am quite sure it was not the
fault of the judges. As I said before, it is fash-
ionable to abuse judges.
Mr. BOWIE, I have not intended to charge
any impropriety upon the part of the judges.
I said the delay grew necessarily out of the ju-
dicial district system, out of the fact that the
judge did not live at the places where justice is
to be administered, but at remote places, and
that every principle of the human mind would
tend to a furtherment of the business, to enable
the judge to go home, to attend to private and
domestic affairs, and that it would be the habit
of the bar to conform themselves to these na-
tural and inherent dispositions of the human
heart.
Mr. CRISFIELD. I understand it. What does
the record show? Why, that not one-half of
the time of the whole year is occupied by the
judges of the gentleman's judicial district in the
performance of their judicial duties. They
only sit about sixty or seventy days in the year.
it is not pretended that they have more work
than they can accomplish. Then, if causes are
continued by reason of the absence of the judg-
es, who might have been in their places, it
is an unnecessary and inexcusable delay, and
nut the result of the district system. Unless
the gentleman can show that the business could
not be accomplished within the time allowed,
unless he can show that it has been crowded out
for want of time, it must be the fault of the
judges. I he gentleman, in acquitting the judges
from all censure, waives, or rather answers his
whole argument. They have all the time ne-
cessarily required in the performance of their
duties; and if the judges do not attend in the
gentleman's district, it is because they do nut
properly perform their duty. I can only say |
that the record shows that in that district they
have ample time, and I call for proof to show that
causes have been continued because judges have
been absent. It is not so in my district, nor in
the neighboring districts. There they have an
act of Assembly which requires the court to
continue causes upon the consent of both par-
ties,
The gentleman argued that We should not
have this district system, because it renders the
judge a traveler, Suppose he is required to
travel. Is there not time for it? There is no
doubt but there will be ample time for the judge
to perform the duly required of him—traveling
included. Does the gentleman doubt it? Where
are his proofs? Here is the record: it shows
that under this system it will not take him half
a year, in most of the districts, to perform all
the labor required of the judge. Then where is
the objection to his traveling from county to
county.
I know the gentleman is not influenced by any
such motive, but a more beautiful system for
promoting the interest of the legal profession
could not be devised. If I were looking to per-
sonal benefit, I could not devise a system that
could better promote my own interests.
Mr, BOWIE, I will say that I fear very much
that some gentlemen may, from motives of false
delicacy, oppose the system, through fear of be-
ing charged with creating offices for themselves.
In my case, the gentleman knows that I do not
seek office, and that under no circumstances
would I, at this time of my life, accept the place
of a judge.
Mr. CRISFIELD, it is enough for me to dis-
claim all inferences from what I say that the
gentleman is influenced by interested motives.
I disclaim that because my remarks, without
such disclaimer, might possibly attach to the
gentleman. I made the disclaimer, not because
I supposed the gentleman was influenced by such
a feeling, but because it might otherwise be
supposed I designed such an inference to be
drawn from the argument I am about to make.
The system, such as desired by the lawyers, is,
in my judgment, the best possible one for the
promotion of that class to which I belong. I
am free to confess that if I could be influenced
by any motive of personal consideration, not
with a view to the judgeship, but with a view
to the practice of my profession, I should go for
this system. I believe, under it, we will have
an incompetent judiciary, I believe we will
have a farmer or a mere layman upon the
bench. I am not willing to trust the public in-
terests in such hands. I want a judge who is
competent, and I want him to apply himself to
his business, so as to be always competent for
the discharge of his duties, if there is too much
labor imposed upon him by my system, lessen
it; demonstrate that the judge cannot perform it
with reasonable diligence, and I will go with
you in lessening it; but I believe he can do it.
It is not worth while to talk in generalities,
about superadding labors to the judge. It proves
nothing. Take the figures and records, and
show that the judge is incapable of performing |
