convention shows that we have been paying
nearly $3,000 a year for the services of special
judges. That will be gotten rid of in a very
great measure by the new system. But it is
a part of the cost of the existing system; and
will continue to be a part of the cost of any
system which takes that as a basis, and makes
any such mere modification of it as has been
proposed. This will give an annual cost of
$48,000 for the judicial system, taking the
basis of the old system as it stands.
Let us see how much we increase that by
adopting this system of having a judge for
each county. We have five judges of the
court of appeals, whose salary we have fixed
at $3,000 a year, making $15,000. Then we
have twenty circuit judges, whose salary will
amount, it we take the basis of the other sala-
ries, to $2,500 each, amounting to $50,000.
Then there are six judges of Baltimore city at
$3,000 a year, reported at $3,900, and esti-
mated at $500 less, as we have stricken down
the salary of the judges of the court of ap-
peals $500 below what was reported for
them—amounting to $18,000 for these six
judges. This makes the system cost $83,000
a year,
The difference between that and $48,000,
which the present system costs, is $35,000.
But what do we save in the operation? It is
fair and just to take into account what is
saved by the adoption of this system. In the
first place, we save the salary and the expenses
which the counties have to pay to twenty
judges of the orphans' court; which would be
fairly estimated at $500 a year, on the aver-
age. That will be a saving of $10,000 a year,
In the matter of the orphans' court judges
alone. Then we shall save the salary of the
special judges; the amount of money paid
every year for the salary of special judges,
now amounting to aboat $3,000 a year,
Then we shall save in the matter of criminal
expenses alone in the counties, the expense of
keeping criminals in jail until the time comes
round for the trial of criminal cases, and de-
lays that attend the present system in trying
criminal cases, at least $300 per year for each
county. I think that would be a fair esti-
mate of the cost in each county of keeping
criminals in jail until we could get a trial
under the present system; which would be a
saving of $6,000 more. Putting these three
items together, they amount to $19,000 a year
saved by the adoption of this system. Then
the difference between the $19,000 and the
$35,000 which the new system would cost
over and above the present system, would be
only $16,000. But if the system of four
judges for the city of Baltimore is left as seems
to be the desire of the convention the differ-
ence between the two systems will be only
about $12,000 a year.
That seems tome to be a fair estimate of
the cost of the two systems when compared
together. It will be only about twelve or |
fifteen thousand dollars, and cannot exceed
twenty thousand dollars a year.
Then what do we gain by the adoption of
this? in the first place we gain this one
great thing. We bring justice home lo every
man's door. We carry out in good faith
that declaration in our bill of rights that
every man for every injury done to his per-
son or his property, shall have justice speedi-
ly without delay. That item alone, it seems
to me; will be worth the whole difference be-
tween these two systems.
Then again we save expense by the speedy
trial of all causes which may come before the
judges in civil and equity cases. We save
vastly in the amount of cost and expense in
that way.
Then we have upon the bench three judges
to determine all causes in which appeals can
be taken to the court of appeals, except equi-
ty cases. All other civil cases will be decided
by putting three adjoining counties into a cir-
cuit and letting the three judges sit as a bench,
going back to the old system of letting three
men decide every case instead of one; so that
we shall have less appeals taken to the court
of appeals; and the saving of expense to the
people of the State will be very large in that
way.
Then I say the saving in the cost of equity
cases, and lessening the fees, is an item which
should be taken into consideration when we
compare these two systems.
If we would make our economy apply where
it ought to apply practically, we should strike
from the court some of the supernumerary
officers who are now attached to the courts and
now receive a, large amount of fees, and per-
quisites, and per diem; and we might save a
large sum in that respect. The gentleman
from Baltimore city, the chairman of the committee.
(Mr. Stockbridge,) says that we should
save twelve thousand dollars a year in that
item alone.
Mr. STIRLING (in his seat.) He is mistaken
in the facts.
Mr. MILLER. There is no mode I have of
estimating the amount; but I know that in
our county there would be a considerable
saving; and I know that in the counties of
this judicial circuit, were county courts or-
ganized, it might be effected, and would be
effected by the judge in this county. We
would get rid of the offices of criers and other
mere ornaments of the count, who loaf about
the court and do nothing but take their fees
and get their pay. We should tumour econo-
my in that direction; and let the great object
which we have in view be to bring home the
administration of justice to every man's door,
and obtain a speedy trial of causes. If we
can obtain that, I say that an additional coat
of twelve or fifteen thousand dollars a year
ought nut to weigh in the estimation of the
convention.
Let us compare this with some other things |
