clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Proceedings and Debates of the 1850 Constitutional Convention
Volume 101, Volume 2, Debates 644   View pdf image
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space
644
most litigious district in the State, and which, at
the time he made the remark, he, (Mr. Blakistone,)
thought was rather invidious, but which he
explained to mean the district in which most
suits were brought. It would be found that the
average number of suits which were brought in
the district composed of St. Mary's Charles and
Prince George's, in those years, averaged 782.
Now, the Convention proposed to give us one
judge, with a population scattered over three
counties, and over a territory which would re-
quire a man to pass over some five or six hundred
miles of travel to hold four terms in each county,
two common law and two equity terms. It would
take him over 250 days, in the performance of
his duties, to dispose of 182 cases. If you would
double the number of cases, you would find it
would be more than the number brought in Baltimore
city court, to wit; 1564, against 1336 in
Baltimore city, an excess of 228 cases.
Mr. MORGAN. Will the gentleman tell me
what is the number of jury trials in Baltimore
district?
Mr. BLAKISTONE. He would give the gentle-
man that information directly. Now, if one
Judge could attend to the judicial business in
three counties, holding six separate common law
terms and as many equity terms, and administer
justice to the whole people of the district, would
it require five judges to administer justice in
Baltimore city, where the population was so
dense and where the judges could get through
a great amount of business in the time that the
circuit or district judge would be engaged in
traveling from one county to another. Well,
his friend (Mr. Morgan called upon the gentle-
man from the city of Baltimore (Mr. Gwinn)
to give the number of jury trials for it was that
sort of trials which imposed the heaviest burdens
upon the courts. As, for Instance, in the case
of notes or single bill it took but little time where
there was no dispute, but it was jury trials where
the cases were argued before the court, and ex-
ceptions were taken, and the court instructs the
jury, that consumes time and renders it necessary
for the judge to be a man of legal acquirements
to decide properly between the litigants in a case.
And by this same record the gentleman from
Baltimore city (Mr. Gwinn) could not dispute
his own record. You will find the number of
jury trials to be 89 in the district composed of
St. Mary's, Charles and Prince George's, and
the number of original suits brought were 872.
Now, before he went any further, he would give
the number in Baltimore city. There were 96
jury trials, and 1336 original suits brought there.
Seven jury trials more and less than double the
number of original suits in the first judicial dis-
trict. But seven more jury trials according to
the paper book! He (Mr. B.) was reading from
that paper read by the gentleman from Balti-
more, and which he presumed was a correct re-
cord. But he would go back to Frederick,
Washington and Allegany. In Frederick coun-
ty alone, he found there were 314 original cases;
number of jury trials 41. There was no return
from Washington and Allegany. If there were
as many in the other two counties, it would make
943 eases. If there were as many trial suits in
Washington and Allegany as in Frederick, those
counties would have 133 trial cases, being 27
more in that judicial district than in the city of
Baltimore.
[Here the President's hammer fell—the time
allotted to the gentleman having expired.]
Mr. BRENT, of Baltimore city, moved to post-
pone. He said the calculations of the gentle-
man from St. Mary's (Mr. Blakistone) were
wholly fallacious, as he could show in a few
words. Now, he (Mr. B.) had said there were
only seven more jury trials in Baltimore city
than in the judicial district from which he came.
Did that prove any thing? Jury trials were not
of the same uniform length. We knew that
sometimes the county court would try five or six
small cases a day.
Mr. BLAKISTONE. Have you not tried a case
that has lasted a week?
Mr. BRENT, of Baltimore city, said he had tried
a jury case in Charles that had lasted three
weeks, but it was of very rare occurrence. Five
or six were usually tried in a day. In Baltimore
city, generally, the civil suits were very heavy
and involved large amounts. He spoke of the
average of cases. Now, let him make a calcu-
lation in order to bring the matter to a test.
As the courts of the city and county of Balti-
more did not sit in the months of July and Au-
gust, we have but ten working months, then de-
duct two months for the court for county busi-
ness.
Mr. BUCHANAN, (in his seat.) Four months.
Mr. BRENT, of Baltimore city. Only two, on
an everage. He knew it had been more lately.
That left about one hundred and ninety-three
working days for Baltimore city business. Ninety-
six cases a year tried in that court, was only at
the average rate of two days for a case. Now,
the gentleman from St. Mary's argued that those
ninety-six jury cases tried in the course of a year
were all the jury cases that stood for trial in the
year. He (Mr. Brent) had shown there were
only one hundred and ninety-three working days
for the city business, and those cases, as far as
they had been tried, averaged two days to a case.
Did that argue that they were all the cases they
had to try? Not at all. It was well known to
members of the bar that we did not try one-fifth
of the cases set down for trial, either for want of
time or because the court did not go through the
docket, or if so, they went through it in such a
hurry as to continue hundreds of cases. Some-
times they got a run upon the docket, when the
witnesses in expected trials were not present, and
run through the entire docket in a whole day, and
thus putting off till the next court a large accu-
mulation of business. If we had a sufficient judi-
cial force it would take every day in the year to
try our cases.
He would state one fact. So dilatory was the
business in our court, owing to the pressure of
business, that a suit which was brought in 1840,
on a bill of exchange, as to whether the endorser
had sufficient notice, was still pending in the
count of appeals, having in that time received but


 
clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Proceedings and Debates of the 1850 Constitutional Convention
Volume 101, Volume 2, Debates 644   View pdf image
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  October 06, 2023
Maryland State Archives