Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

far as regards taking the appointment from the Governor, he agreed in the propriety of the course: but he disagreed on the subject of its being better in the hands of the people. That the appointments of the Executive have not been satisfactory to the people, has arisen from that fertile source of evils--party discipline. He did not believe that this discipline and party influence would be moderated by sending those officers to the people to be elected. He had confidence in the people in all parts properly subject to the immediate action of the people. As one of the people, as a member of that class of which he must feel proud--a freeman of Pennsylvania, he did not wish to have any share in the election of these officers. The old practice of appointment by the courts he considered to be the best. He thought it proper that the Judges should have the privilege of appointing their clerks. The records would be better preserved if the appointment of clerks be given to all the courts, as we were now prepared to give that privilege to the Supreme court. It would be admited that although a clerk might record a letter accurately, there are few who could make up a record of fifty years to make titles perfect which run back through that period. The last tenant may have lived beyond the reach of ordinary proof. He had known records taken from the pigeon holes, when it became necessary to make room, and thrown into the cellar. Judges are to be deprived of agency in reference to papers. The Prothonotary feels himself independent of them, and between him and the county commissioners, who have no interest in the security of records, they are arranged and disposed of. This was wrong. He did not believe the committee would agree with him, but he desired to take the sense of the body on an amendment which he would propose. He then moved to amend the amendment by striking therefrom in the first and second lines, the words “ except the prothonotaries of the Supreme court who", and inserting the word "respective" in the second line, between the word "the" and the word "court”, and striking from the fifth and sixth lines the words, "or the districts over which the jurisdiction of said courts extends".

Mr. DORAN asked for the yeas and nays on this motion, and they were ordered.

Mr. DUNLOP said, there was a general disposition throughout Pennsyl vania, to cut down the power of the Executive, to lessen the asperity of elections, and dilate the bitterness of party. It had been well remarked by the gentleman from Northampton, that the party which was likely to have the Governor was desirous to take away from him the power of appointment. He thought the majority party ought to take the amendment, because it would take the elections out of the hands of the minority who have the Governor.

With regard to parties, he held that the minority party were the business part of the community, and that they only make politics their pursuit when it will improve their business, and the moment the election has gone by, they continue their regular pursuits and do not meddle with the matter; but the majority party is composed of men of not so much busi ness, and who have more time to wrangle for appointments. Then it seemed to him that those of the majority party ought to go for giving these appointments to the courts, who were appointed by a majority GoHe asserted that the great mass of the population were generally

vernor.

principles got uppermost; but as he had no doubt it was the wish of the people of Pennsylvania, that the patronage of the Governor should be cut down, he was willing to gratify that wish, and if this patronage was taken from the Governor, he did not know where it would be more proper to vest it than in the courts. It certainly was proper that the courts should have the appointment of their own clerks. They undoubtedly were more competent to judge of the qualifications of these officers, than the Governor or the people.

Mr. DORAN thought the Judges had too much power already, and if this power was taken from the courts, it should be given to the people.

Mr. EARLE thought, if the gentleman would modify his amendment so as to give the courts power to remove those officers for misconduct, it might be more acceptable to the committee.

Mr. MEREDITH Could not assent to this, because it might bring the courts in conflict with the people.

Mr. EARLE did not wish this observation to be so construed, as to convey the idea that he was in favor of giving the courts the power to appoint these officers. He was for having them elected by the people.

Mr. MEREDITH had understood the gentleman, but he could not adopt the suggestion, because he did not think it would be right to bring the courts into conflict with the people. The people might elect a Clerk of the court, who would misbehave the very first day; and if he was a popu lar man with the people, and the court turned him out, it would at once create a difficulty between the people and the court.

Mr. DUNLOP said, that the few words which had just fallen from the two gentlemen from Philadelphia, showed that an election of these officers, for a term of years, would be improper. They were the officers of the court; the mere hand of the court, to execute its orders, yet, if they were elected for a term of years, they would be independent of the court, indedependent of the Governor, and independent of the people themselves; and they might refuse to execute the orders of the court, and where was the remedy. As they were appointed at present, the Governor might, and undoubtedly would remove them, upon the representation of the courts.Suppose the officer refuses to obey the orders of the court? Suppose the court order him to make an entry in a particular way, and he refuses to do it? What was to be done? The court might take the matter from him, and say they would make the entry themselves; but he may say to them, that he is the officer of the court, and keeper of the records. This is the predicament you may be placed in, by giving the election of these officers to the people for three years. The courts had no patronage to be abused, and he had no doubt, but the people would approve of giving the appointment of these officers to the courts, As to getting rid of these officers by impeachment, it might be wholly impracticable, because in many instances they would not be removed before their commissions expired. It would be something like a court in Georgia, passing sentence upon certain Indians, and after they were hung, sending the record to the Supreme Court, to see if they would reverse the judgment. He would ask gentlemen to turn to their constituents and enquire whether they would not be perfectly satisfied, to allow these appointments to remain with the courts, if they were taken from the Governor. It seemed to him, that the people of the whole State would acquiesce in this proposition, but at any rate, he hoped

it might now be adopted, to see if they would not be satisfied with it, and if it should be discovered hereafter, that it did not meet their views, it could he struck out on second reading.

Mr. FORWARD believed if the appointments of the Clerks of courts were confided to the courts themselves, that there would be a stronger probability of obtaining good officers. He said this frankly and openly, that the chances for obtaining capable and efficient officers from the courts, might be better than from the people; yet, with this concession, and under this belief, he was not prepared to vote for this amendment, and he thought one good reason why he should not vote for it, had been brought to the notice of the committee by the gentleman from Franklin, (Mr. DUNLOP,) which was, that we should keep politics as far removed from the Judiciary of Pennsylvania as possible. Has it not been conceded by all, that a party Governor, and political Judges, have brought together a Convention, in this State, of a political character? Is it not a fact, that Judges in this Commonwealth, are found acting in concert with political partizans, in township and county meetings, and in State Conventions, and that these Judges are leading partisans? Is it not a fact, that Judges of the courts, in Pennsylvania, are found on county committees, as agents, and aiders of their political party throughout the State? Is it not a fact that the Governor when he appoints a political partisan to a Judgeship, expects his aid and support; and is it not a fact, that those Judges adhere to him, in many instances, as closely as any other partisans? Every gentleman must know this to be the fact, and he would appeal to them to say, whether, the placing of this patronage in their hands, would not still more closely unite them to their political parties? And the reason why he should oppose it, was, that it might lead to a system of favoritism, which would, by no means, conduce to the benefit of the public. Again, he did not believe, that the people of Pennsylvania would ever submit to it. Even admiting that it might be desirable, and that the officers selected by the courts would be more competent to discharge their duties, than those selected by the people, still the people never would submit to it, and it would be in vain to attempt to control public opinion in this matter. He was confident the people of his county never would consent that the Judges of the court should make the appointments, because they would at once feel, that the office would be given to some relation of the Judges, or some person connected with the party to which the officers of the court belonged, and he imagined this would be the case all over the State. He had no idea of mixing up with the Judiciary, any matter which would bind them any closer to political parties than they were now, as he believed it would have a most deleterious influence upon the correct administration of that important branch of our Government. He would have them administer justice impartially, without regard to politics, or party organization; and he never could consent, that the Judiciary should, in any way, be connected with the political parties of the State.

Mr. MEREDITH was in hopes, when the gentleman from Allegheny commenced his remarks, that he was going to support the amendment before the committee; because it appeared to him, when he conceded that it was probable that better officers would be appointed, he had conceded the whole ground, and that he should have determined to vote for the amendment.—

tent officers to fill these situations. This was the whole matter to be enquired into, because the preservation of the records of the court, were of the most vital importance to the people. This was what the people had most interest in, and if we obtained the means of securing competent and faithful officers, it was, in his opinion, all that was demanded of us by the people. If we secure to them, the preservation of that which protects them in their property, and the titles to their lands, the people will not inquire of us any thing about the manner in which appointments are made. He thought, it was the duty of this Convention to take this patronage from the Governor, because it was admited, on all hands, that it had not been properly exercised; and he thought it further to be our duty to vest the appointment in the hands of those who would select the most fit, competent, and efficient officers. But, the gentleman from Allegheny says, it would be improper to give the appointment of those officers to the Judges, because there are in the State, Judges who belong to political parties, and who would play into the hands of these parties, in the making of these appointments. He admited, there were parties, and it was impossible entirely to avoid the influence of party, in appointments, but he was proud to have it to say, that he believed there was no party in this commonwealth, in whose ranks, men entirely competent to fill public trusts were not to be found. It would be no objection to him, that the Clerk of a court should be selected from the ranks of a party opposed to him in politics, if the individual selected, was competent to fill the situation, and an honest, upright, and honorable man, and he apprehended, there was no Judge in the Commonwealth who would be so lost to all self respect, as to appoint an individual to be a Clerk of a court, who was not a man of ability and integrity. It was a matter of indifference to him, so that the records of the court were properly kept, and the entries made in due form, whether the office was filled by an individual opposed to him in politics or not. Another view which the gentleinan from Allegheny had taken of this question, was, that the people would never agree to have the courts make these appointments. Well, if they would not agree to it, they might reject it.We are a body assembled here, to propose amendments to the people, and we have assembled without any instructions from the people, so that we are to propose such amendments as seem to us right and proper. Then, if it appears to us, that the selections will be best made by the Judges, it is our bounden duty to submit to the people an amendment, proposing to give the appointment to the Judiciary; and if they do'nt like the amendment, they can reject it. In saying this, he did not wish to be understood as urging this course with a view of preserving the old Constitution. He did not speak in that sense; but it did seem to him, that gentlemen could not help voting for the amendment, if they believed these officers would be better appointed by the courts, than by the people. He hoped, therefore, that the gentleman from Allegheny himself. would see the propriety of voting for this amendment, as he had conceded that the appointments would be best made under it.

Mr. SILL said, if he was perfectly convinced of the correctness of the position assumed by the gentleman from the city, (Mr. MEREDITH), and conceded by the gentleman from Allegheny, (Mr. FORWARD), he would go in favor of the amendment; but he could not but entertain some serious

reason.

we had better give the appointment of these officers to them, and for this In the first place, it would be a great matter of convenience to give the appointment of these officers to the Supreme Court, because of the size of the districts; but there was another and a stronger reason why he would prefer giving the appointment of these officers to this court. This reason was, that the Constitution of this court was such as to make it competent to judge of the qualifications of those persons who might apply for these situations. What was the Constitution of this court? It was constituted of law judges, of men of great experience and knowledge in matters of law; of men not only conversant with matters of law, but with the records of courts, and with all other matters necessary in the administration of justice. If we were to take this court, then he would coneur in opinion with the gentleman from Philadelphia, that they were more competent to judge of the abilities of the clerks of their courts. There was another reason why he should be willing to vest these appointments with this court. These judges were men generally advanced in years, who had made the study of the law their exclusive business, who were presumed to have withdrawn from the active political contests of the day, and who had determined upon devoting themselves to the discharge of the duties of their offices. In consequence of all this, he thought there would be a peculiar propriety in investing these appointments in this court. How stood the matter with respect to the District Court? That court was composed of but one Judge, who was appointed from his great experience in the law. He alone consti utes the court, and has no person to control him, and he may be presumed to be a competent judge of the qualification of a person to act as clerk to the court, and he would be in favor of vesting the appoiniment of the clerk of that court in this judge. But how was it with regard to the Court of Common Pleas, and other inferior courts? Are the majority of these courts composed of men skilled in the law? No, sir, they are not. They are composed of men, to be sure, who are men of respectability and integrity, generally; but we know, in the appointment of these, as well as other officers, political considerations are taken into view, and we know that men are frequently appointed to fill these stations, who are no better qualified to judge of the qualifications of men who would be required to keep the records of the court, than a majority of their fellow citizens. For this reason, he could see no propriety in divesting the great body of the people of this right, and the leaving it with the courts, a great majority of whom do not profess at all to be legal characters, and who cannot be any better able to judge of the qualifications of the officers than the people themselves. These men do not profess to be judges in matters of law, and why give to them the selection of a man whom the people were as competent to select. It was said, by some gentlemen, that the duties of these officers were to preserve the records of the court, and the court being interested in the correctness and safe keeping of these records, ought to have the appointment of them. Now, it is true, that they are the records of the court; but, in point of fact, who are the persons really interested in the safe keeping of these records? Is it the court? It may be so, or it may not. If a member of the court is interested in a suit, he suffers in consequence of a mistake being made in the record. But it is those

« ZurückWeiter »