THE
BREVIER LEGISLATITE REPORTS
FOURTEENTH VOLUME.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
Judges' Salaries.-Debate in Continuation.
IN SENATE.
TUESDAY, January 14, 1873.CONTINUED FROM MIDDLE or FIRST COLUMN PAGE 38.]
[Afternoon Session.]
The bill [S. 9.] to fix the salaries of Judges, being the special order for two o'clock, was taken up and the minority and majority reports of the committee were read.
Mr. ORR thought the salaries of the Judges should not be fixed until the redistricting bill had been disposed of. He moved that the reports lie on the table, but withheld the motion for -
Mr. RHODES. It seems to me it is taking the direction of childs play for us to make this bill the special order from time to time, and then whenever the time arrives, to postpone it again. I apprehend if the Legislature at this session should change the Judicial districts it would not affect this question as to whether the salaries of judges ought to be increased or not. I apprehend if the committee on that subject shall redistrict the State they will give the judges all the work they can do. This is a reform that is needed, for it is plain that in certain districts of the State the judges are idle part of the time and in other districts they are over-worked. They should all be employed as much of the time as is proper under the circumstances : and if that is done we are prepared now to say what the services of judges are worth. If that is done it seems to me it is entirely unimportant whether the State is redistricted or not at this session.
Mr. R. did not see the necessity for postponing the measure. The majority of the committee had fixed upon the sums which they deemed proper and necessary to secure the services of competent men, and that report ought to be adopted. When the State is redistricted it will be easy to so arrange the districts as that each Judge shall sit a reasonable length of time each year; but that was a seperate matter, and it did not affect the question of doing justice to the judges.
Mr. BOONE. The Senate at the last session ordered the issuing of a circular letter to the clerks of courts requesting information regarding the business of the courts. There has been no answer to these letters, but we suppose there will be in a few days. It is an easy matter to increase the number of judges, but I imagine to diminish the number of judges will not be so easy a matter. While we may have the power it will be difficult for Senators and Representatives to exercise that authority against their friends. I could vote upon the Supreme Court question before receiving the information called for, but I feel that I would not be able to vote intelligently on the entire question presented in this bill. And I imagine other Senators are in the same condition. I desire that all the Judges shall be well paid and that they should have a compensation corresponding with the amount of business they are called upon to transact. There is no use in my judgment, in acting upon this matter hastily. We do too much business hastily.
page: 297[View Page 297]Mr. B., was in favor of a postponement of the question until the information which was requested of the clerks of courts was received, and the State was redistricted.
Mr. ORR'S motion which had been temporarily withdrawn, was renewed and carried.
On motion of Mr. Brown, the bill was taken from the table and read the second time.
Mr. STEELE moved that it be inferred to a committee of three with instructions to report a bill fixing the salaries of the Supreme Judges alone.
Mr. GLESSNER. I am opposed to this motion. Lawyers all agree that a cheap judiciary above all other things is to be avoided, and my judgment is that the bane of the present system has been a want of compensation on the part of judges. Some Senators say that whenever a bill is introduced to equalize the burdens of judges throughout the State, then they are willing to vote for a higher compensation. Is not that argument a bad one? Isn't the reverse true? Is it not our duty to raise the salaries to a fair and just compensation and then redistrict the State so as to equalize the burdens and give to each judge 35 or 40 weeks labor to perform during the year? We expected to raise these salaries two years ago, but there was an early adjournment of the Legislature and it was defeated. Some judges have five or six counties in their districts, and are they to be required to still perform their duties for the meagre compensation they are now receiving; when we all say the number of circuits ought to be increased; and all admit that the people are demanding it? Shall we require these men to labor for yet another two years at this mere pittance, because the judge of some other district has not labor enough assigned to him to require his entire time? Senators will recollect that two years ago from many counties throughout the State petitions were coming in asking that the General Assembly increase the compensation of the judges throughout the State. Governor Baker in his last message to the Legislature suggested the propriety and urged the necessity of increasing the compensation of judges throughout the State. Governor Hendricks but yesterday called the attention of the General Assembly to the same thing, and called our attention to the fact that a cheap judiciary was a thing we should avoid; we should raise the compensation of judges to a standard that would call out the best men we have in the State for that position. When we all admit that the compensation is not what it should be, why do we hesitate? Why now seek to avoid meeting this demand by further delaying the passage of this bill?
Mr. G. was in favor of the passage of the bill in its original shape. Very many of the judges throughout the State are underpaid, and simple justice demands that the deficiency be supplied at once. While he was in favor of increasing the salaries of the Supreme Court, he was still more in favor of increasing the compensation of the judges of the Circuit and Common Pleas courts. The State could then be redistricted, the labors of the judges equalized, and the number of districts decreased.
Mr. STEELE. What harm can there be in seperating the bill in the way proposed? If it is settled in our minds that the salary of the Supreme Judges should be increased, why not enact the law at once? In the committee I believe I favored the highest amount placed in the bill, stating at the time that we desired the best talent in the country and in order to obtain that talent we must pay the price that would induce legal gentlemen to quit their practice and attend to the matters incident to the calling of a judge. I am prepared to vote for an increase of salaries to all the judges. Other Senators appear not to have their minds fully made up as to all the judges. For the purpose of giving them further time, I propose to seperate this bill and pass now upon the question of increasing the salaries of Supreme Judges.
Mr. HARNEY. I am in favor of the proposition to increase the salaries of the Supreme Judges. It is evident that there are many Senators not yet ready to vote for an increase of salaries of the inferior judges, and for that reason I am in favor of seperating this bill. If it be the pleasure of the Senate I will now introduce a bill to increase the salaries of Supreme Judges to $5,000 a year. [Objection being made, he withheld it.]
Mr. BOONE moved to postpone the further consideration of the matter until Wednesday of next week at 10:30 A. M.
The motion was agreed to.
