thoroughly and properly the duties which my
system proposes. I claim that the true interests
of the people require that this system should be
adopted. I believe that the public interests
would not be subserved by a judge to a single
county. I believe that litigation would multiply,
and for this reason I say that my craft would be
interested in carrying this into effect. I am
against it. I look to the practice of my pro-
fession, it is true, for a livelihood, but I trust I
shall never desire my own profits to be increased
in this manner. I believe the greatest curse to
a country is an inefficient judiciary. I wish to
preserve my State and myself from it, I be-
lieve the best means of having a good judge is
to give him plenty to do. No matter what his
merits may be, when he goes upon the bench
unless he has work to employ him, he will soon
rust and become good for nothing. No man
would think of employing a lawyer out of prac-
tice to try his cause; a judge without work is
a lawyer out of practice, and you would select
to decide your cause a man you would not per-
mit for want of practice to try it. The best
judge, is the judge best worked. If you make
a county judge, his judicial duties will not oc-
cupy one-forth of his time, and quite likely he
will be a farmer. His thoughts will be upon
his crops and his farm. His mind will be ab-
stracted from his judicial duties. He will sink
the judge in the farmer. In the hands of such
a man, however honest, and well-intentioned he
may be, public justice will be uncertainly and
badly administered. I desire a man upon the
bench who will be a judge, and nothing but a
judge; I desire that he should be paid reason-
ably and fairly. I would give him the neces-
sary time for recreation, for intercourse with
his family, for the improvement of himself,
hut his business hours should be the public's.
In that way, and in that way only, I think
we can have a safe, wise and efficient judi-
ciary,
Mr. SPENCER said; I desire to make some re-
marks upon this subject. I regret that I should
be compelled to submit what I have to say at
this late hour of the day. In my judgment, this
is one of the most important and interesting
subjects that can be considered by this Conven-
tion. The gentleman from Somerset (Mr. Cris-
field) and myself agree so much, that there is
hardly a distinction between us. The main dif-
ference consists in this: he makes eight judicial
districts, including the city of Baltimore, while
I make nine judicial districts, including that
city. Besides, he throws into the district in
which I have the honor to reside, four counties
instead of three, which I think is unreasonable,
and I therefore object to it. But I subscribe to
all the principles upon which he has conducted
this discussion. I propose to exhibit to this
Convention, in addition to what the gentleman
has exhibited, evidence which must convince
every mind that the district system, as recom-
mended by him, is the correct system. The
statistics which he has exhibited I should have
exhibited had he not done so, and for the same
purposes. I have used them throughout the |
district in which I reside, to show the extravagant
character of our judiciary. The gentle-
man from Prince George's, (Mr. BOWIE,) who
opposes this proposition, says that the statistics
exhibited prove that justice without delay has
been denied to the people of this State, and the
necessary argument thereby is, that the respon-
sibility is upon the bench, and there the respon-
sibility must rest,
Mr. BOWIE. I say that the responsibility is
upon the Convention, which does not choose to
devise a different system, not upon the bench.
I never intimated such an idea.
Mr. SPENCER. I understand my friend. Let
that be as it may. The tendency of the remarks
of the gentleman from Prince George's was to
show that the delay in the trial of causes was
attributable to the bench and not to the bar. I
believe that there is fault on both sides; that the
fault of protracted terms is with the bar as well
as the bench. And now allow me to say to my
friend from Somerset, (Mr. Crisfield,) that he
has not given the true reason why the act of
Assembly to which he referred was passed.
The thing which gave rise to that act was this.
When causes came up on the peremptory dock-
et for trial, they could only be continued on legal
grounds, of which the court were to judge.
The court would not allow them to be continued
upon the consent of counsel. It often happened
that a cause came up for trial, and although the
counsel in the case believed that justice required
it should be continued, yet the courts were un-
willing to be regulated by the wishes of the
counsel, who would force it to trial. It was for
this reason that the act of Assembly was passed.
The fault found with the courts has been that
they were disposed to press too much, regard-
less of the interest of parties, and the desire of
counsel. Justice requires me to say that, in
most cases, causes are continued, because the
counsel are not ready. This statement I deem
it my duty to make,
I now come to what I deem the more material
part of this discussion, and I expect to argue this
subject more by facts than by words. This is my
purpose. The system as recommended by the
gentleman from Prince George's cannot, in my
judgment, be sustained. According to his esti-
mates, leaving out of view the administration of
justice by magistrates, the expenses of our pres-
ent judiciary are $71,200. He now proposes by
his present system, to reduce the expenses of the
judiciary to $62,500. According to the schedule
of expenses as first recommended by him, it was
$61,000, (as will be found by reference to page
310 of the journal.) But since that time we
lave had the bill under consideration and have
added another judge to the court of appeals, at a
salary of $2,500, which makes the expenses now
$62,500. The gentleman from Somerset county
has aspired to show that this State does not re-
quire a judge for every county in the State; that.
the business of the State will not justify it. in
addition to what he has said, I will remark that
so far as my county is concerned, it never would |
