was could not readily be found. For although
the Convention bad decided by a vote of 61 to
21 that the Orphans' Court should be retained,
and that chancery power should be given to the
judges of the county court, the gentleman set
himself against that vote. And he (Mr. T.)
could say that he would not have persevered
even in a good cause beyond that example.
Now it was said that he was about to vote to
put one judge on the bench of the Orphans'
Court, and that in doing so we were going to
sanction the plan of the gentleman from Prince
George's. There was still a great difference
between the two. By his (Mr. Thomas's) vote
be was forced to countenance an Orphans' Court
system altogether different from the one he pre-
ferred, He might be compelled to take a de-
fective arrangement of the Court with one judge
only. He preferred three judges for the Or-
phans' Court. But it was not the peculiarity in
having one judge that recommended the measure
to his adoption. He saw in this measure one
redeeming feature that gave to it an advantage
over that of the Judiciary Committee. The one
judge of this Orphans' Court was to be paid a
per diem allowance out of the treasury of
the county, but the one judge of the Judici-
ary Committee is to be paid from the State
Treasury.
There was this difference between the two
schemes. He had practiced in the Orphans'
Court and in the County Courts. He had been
more successful before judges and jurors than
ho had been in the Orphans' Court. It was true
that he had been overruled in the Orphans'
Court more than once, and could not therefore
be biased, as the gentleman supposed. But
why, he asked, did he prefer that system to this
Court to which the people were generally ac-
customed? Because there was in the Orphans'
Court no system of special pleading—an old an-
tiquated system of proceeding) not founded in
common sense, but an artificial sytem built up
in an age that was proud of a scholastic learn-
ing that many now repudiate; a system which
required the memory to be more exercised than
the understanding to comprehend it. He wished
to see every man, whether educated as a lawyer
or not, eligible to the Orphans' Court bench, if
lie had the requisite qualification in other re-
spects.
Mr, BOWIE. I profess to give them common
law jurisdiction.
Mr. THOMAS. And chancery jurisdiction also.
No man was acquainted with the defects of the
forms of proceeding in chancery more thorough-
ly than the gentleman himself. Under the or-
phans' court the proceedings were informal, the
mode of proceed ing was different from that of the
courts of the counties Any man of sound judg-
ment and business habits was competent to pre-
side there. Here was a wide, broad distinction
between the proposition of the gentleman from
Prince George's, and that he was willing to
take as an alternative. He was for an orphans'
court organized with three judges. If that
could not be had, he would prefer a court with
|
one judge to one judge system of the commit-
tee, because, as he had said, these judges of the
orphans' courts were to be paid a per diem, and
they were not to be paid from the Frederick
county treasury, but they were to be paid by
the people of the county whom they were to
serve. Mr. T. concluded by withdrawing the
motion to postpone indefinitely.
Mr DAVIS renewed the motion to postpone in-
definitely.
He said, this is a very important question : one
in which the people have and feel a deep inter-
est. From all other Courts we may escape:—wo
may either decline to follow what we consider our
just rights through the uncertainties of courts of
law; or to prevent litigation may submit to injus-
tice and wrong. But from the Orphans' Court
none can escape. Sooner or later every man's
property passes through this tribunal. Hence its
great importance to all persons and to all parts of
the Commonwealth.
He came here with some prejudices against the
system of the Orphans' Court as at present organ-
ized :—he had been a member of that court in
his county a short time only, but long enough
to discover what he thought the imperfections of
the system;—he knew that there were complaints
among the people against it, but before he voted
for a new system, he wished to be satisfied that it
was an improvement and better than the old.—
The argument in favor of the old system, and he
admitted that it was a strong one, was that the
people were familiar with it. They had long been
accustomed to transact business in it, and it was
a court which every man, however humble or diffident
he may be, could approach without difficul-
ty. If you adopt the single judge system as pro-
posed by the gentleman from Prince George's (Mr.
Bowie,) the practical result, he thought, would
be to place the Orphans' Court in the hands of the
legal profession. You introduce forms and tech-
nicalities to which the people are not accustomed,
and will thereby be likely greatly to increase the
costand expense of transacting business in that
court. He had no prejudices against that pro-
fession. He respected and honored its members,
in their appropriate sphere. But the salary and
position is not sufficient to tempt a good lawyer
to accept it; and of all classes of men save him
from a third or fourth rate lawyer. If we can-
not have choice of the profession, give us a man
of sound practical sense from the ordinary pur-
suits of life, such a man, guided alone by a sense
of right and justice, will seldom be wrong. In
nine times out of ten, his decisions will stand the
test of legal criticism. If the choice then, lies
between .the proposed and the old system, he must
yield up his prejudices and go back to the old.
It is due to candor to confess tha this prejudices
against the old system, have been very much re-
moved since he came here. He had felt it his
duty to seek imformation from those whose learn-
ing and experience qualified them to judge, and
the result was a conviction that the old system
was better than any which had been or was like-
ly to be proposed in this body. He should there-
fore vote against the plan of his friend from Prince |
