act. We propose also to give the court of
common pleas additional facilities for the
performance of these additional duties. We
take away from the court of common pleas
the appeals from magistrates in relation to
criminal cases. According to the present
constitution, appeals from the magistrates in
all cases go up to the court of common pleas.
Mr. STOCKBRIDGE. Not in all,
Mr. THOMAS. Yes, they do, except in the
case of violation of the city ordinances. There
are hundreds of cases every year in that court,
involving the recovery of fines, penalties, and
forfeitures, under the State laws, quasi crimi-
nal cases, which should properly go to a crim-
inal court. We propose to give these cases to
the criminal court, so that you will have the
common law jurisdiction confined to two
courts, which will increase their facilities,
and the whole criminal jurisdiction will be
confined to one court, and the equity juris-
diction will be divided between the present
circuit court of Baltimore city and the equity
court of Baltimore city, which will give them
additional facilities for the performance of the
duties assigned.
This system has been in operation for four-
teen years, and there is no complaint yet in
the city of Baltimore in relation to its courts;
and it appears to me that the city of Balti-
more is entitled to have courts just as they
now stand; because, I contend, they will be
,more acceptable to the people, I contend too
that the report of this committee renders it
more complicated than it now is. For in-
stance, it is proposed by this report to give to
the judges of the circuit court, which is to be
composed of the present criminal court and
the circuit court, both equity and criminal
.jurisdiction, and also to make one of the
judges of that court the chief justice of the
orphans' court. This convention has already
decided that the orphans' court system shall
remain just as it is. If you adopt the system as
proposed by the committee in relation to the
courts of Baltimore city, you have got to
break up the orphans' court system, which
you have already established and made uni-
form throughout the State.
Then in relation to the three-judge system
as proposed by the committee, it will work
badly in this way. There is a provision that
whenever a man wants a case tried he shall
be entitled to three judges.
Mr. STOCKBRIDGE. There is no such pro-
vision.
Mr. THOMAS. Two judges, then. Now
suppose one of the judges is on the bench of
the orphans' court. Another one sits every
day to try cases. A lawyer comes in and
wants to postpone a case. He sees one judge
upon the bench, and knows that another one
is sick, for you cannot prevent sickness, and
he claims two judges, and is entitled to the
postponement of his case. According to the
practice now he is not entitled to the post- |
ponement of the case unless the parties agree,
or unless he has a legal ground of continu-
ance under the law, I say that so far as the
trial of cases is concerned, the system is better
and more expeditious under the present sys-
tem than it would be under three judges,
Mr, STIRLING. I shall support the amend-
ment my colleague has offered; and 1 desire
very briefly to assign my reasons for doing
so, because 1 regret to differ from my col-
league who introduced this report, who has
bad a great deal of experience in these mat-
ters, and whose opinion with regard to them
is worth a good deal. Upon careful examina-
tion I have not been able to agree with him,
and 1 desire very briefly to state my reasons
for differing.
The system which has been reported by the
committee has already been so far altered with
regard to the counties that the proposition
would now apply to Baltimore city a condi-
tion of courts entirely different from the courts
of the counties, it would establish a one-
judge system in the counties, and a three-
judge system in the city. It strikes me that
there is something anomalous in that provis-
ion. There is one great advantage in the
courts as we now have them in Baltimore, It
is the advantage of perfect and entire sim-
plicity. There is one judge for equity busi-
ness; and under the substitute system there
may be three judges for equity business who are
to alternate or distribute themselves; and the
consequence will be that where you now have
one certain man you will have two or three
uncertain men. The judges will be obliged
either to assign some one permanently to
transact the equity business, which will not
be very easy consistently with the provision
allowing a party to require two judges upon
the bench, or they will have to distribute it
among themselves.
The people are accustomed to the systems
we have now; and this system produces a
radical change in the whole system of the
courts. I should be indisposed to adopt it
without strong reasons for so doing. In
investigating this subject, I have made it my
business to inquire of the judges; and 1 state
it as a matter of fact, which is certainly enti-
tled to very great weight, that the judges of
the courts of Baltimore city are unanimously
opposed to the changes proposed. If their
judgment is that this change is not wise,—
they have no interest in the matter, for it is
not proposed to disturb their offices—they are
gentlemen whose opinion is entitled to great
weight. They have told me, without excep-
tion, that they do not approve of the change
introduced by the report of the committee.
With regard to the fact stated by colleague
(Mr. Thomas,) with regard to the court of com-
mon pleas, it is true that Judge King not only
attends to all the business of that court but
has time to spare, abundant time to spare.
Where is the press of business? There is |
