the business of forwarding or transporting on the lines thereof; and all regulations adopted by the companies owning, controling or managing such railroads or canals, having the effect of hindering or discriminating against individuals, partnerships or corporations, except as above excepted, in the transportation of property on such railroads and canals, shall be void; and no railroad corporation, nor any lessee or manager of the works thereof, shall make any preference in their own favor, or between individuals, partnerships and companies shipping and transporting thereon, in furnishing cars or motive power.

SECTION 9. No railroad, canal or transportation company shall issue any stock or bonds, except for money, labor or property actually received and applied to the purposes for which such corporation was created; and all stock dividends, and other fictitious increase of the capital stock or indebtedness of any such corporations, shall be void. The capital stock and corporate indebtedness of railroad, canal or other corporations, engaged in the business of common carriers or transporters, shall not be increased, except in pursuance of a general law, nor without the consent of a majority in value of the stockholders of such corporation first obtained at a meeting to be held after sixty days' notice given in pursuance of law. All laws heretofore enacted by which an increase of the capital stock, or of the bonds or other evidences of indebtedness of any railroad or canal corporation, has been authorized, are hereby declared void, except so far as may be necessary to maintain the obligation of contracts made and executed in accordance therewith.

SECTION 10. All municipal, railroad, canal and other corporations and individuals shall be liable for the payment of damages to property, resulting from the construction and enlargement of their works, as well to owners of property not actually taken as to those whose property is taken; and said damages shall be paid, or secured to be paid, before the injury is

done.

SECTION 11. No street passenger railway shall be constructed within the limits of any city, borough or township without the consent of its local authorities.

SECTION 12. No railroad, canal or other transportation company in existence at the time of the adoption of this article, shall have any beneficial legislation by general or special laws, except on condi

tion of complete acceptance of all the provisions of this article.

SECTION 13. The existing powers and duties of the Auditor General in regard to railroads, canals and other transportation companies are hereby transferred to the Secretary of Internal Affairs, subject to such regulations and alterations as shall be provided by law, and in addition to the annual reports now required to be made, said Secretary may require special reports, at any time, upon any subject relating to the business of said companies, from any officer or officers thereof; and it shall be his duty, on complaint mad against said corporations by any citizen, person or company interested, of a violation by law or any infraction of the ru of said corporation, injurious to the right or interests of such complainant, to investigate said complaint; and if it shall appear that any such violation has taken place, he shall proceed either against said corporation, or the officers thereof, or both; and if, on complaint made, or of his own knowledge, it shall appear that any railroad, or part thereof, is so insufficiently or carelessly constructed,supported, guarded, protected, or so out of repair as to imperil life or property, he shall at once notify such delinquent corporation of the same, and specify and direct the remedy to be applied, and it shall be the duty of such corporation to repair, support, make safe from, or remove said cause of peril under such regulation, not inconsistent herewith, as shall be prescribed by the Legislature to carry this section into full effect.

SECTION 14. Railroad companies shall have the right to connect their railroads, by proper connections, with the railroads of each other, and shall have the right to pass their cars, either empty or loaded, over each other's railroads, free from discrimination in rates or charges, and without delay or hindrance in their move

ments.

THE JUDICIARY REPORT.

Mr. S. A. PURVIANCE. I move you, sir, that the consideration of the report of the Judiciary Committee be assigned for Monday next at eleven o'clock.

The PRESIDENT. The motion is not in order without leave of the House.

Mr. S. A. PURVIANCE. I ask leave of the House that the report of the Judiciary Committee be fixed for Monday at eleven o'clock.

The PRESIDENT. The Chair will suggest that the making of special orders

only tends to entanglements. If it is the general understanding to take up that report at the hour named, it will then be taken up; but if an hour is now fixed, when that hour arrives we may be in committee of the whole on another subjeet, and thus embarrassment would be occasioned.

Mr. HARRY WHITE. Allow me to remark that the chairman of the committee, (Mr. Armstrong,) in going out, asked me, if the matter came up in his absence, to request the committee, if any hour was fixed, to fix it for Monday.

Mr. KAINE. That report is the first business in order at any rate. It has been a special order every day, but the article

on railroads and canals had precedence by a vote of the Convention.

The PRESIDENT. It is not a special order for Monday next, and a special order at a particular hour always leads to entanglement, except in what are really and strictly political bodies, where all advantages are taken and where things are purposely entangled for the purpose of getting those advantages; but in a body like this, the making of special orders is a mistake.

Mr. DE FRANCE. I move that the Convention adjourn.

The motion was agreed to, and, at five o'clock and forty-one minutes P. M., the Convention adjourned to meet on Monday next at ten o'clock.

637

MONDAY, April 28, 1873.

The Convention met at ten o'clock A. M., Hon W. M. Meredith, President, in the chair.

Prayer by Rev. J. W. Curry.

tion, because it will be observed that if in the commencement of the discussion we turn our attention to the details of any system that may be proposed here for a circuit court, after discussing for days

THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM.

Mr. LILLY. I move that the Convention resolve itself into committee of the

whole to consider the article reported by the Committee on the Judiciary.

The motion was agreed to, and the Convention resolved itself into committee of the whole, Mr. Harry White in the chair. The CHAIRMAN. The committee of the

whole have had referred to them the re

port of the Committee on the Judiciary, proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the State, in the form of an article on the Judiciary. The first section of the article will be read.

The CLERK read as follows:

OF THE JUDICIARY.

SECTION 1. The judicial power of the Commonwealth shall be vested in a Supreme Court, in a circuit court, in courts of oyer and terminer and general jail delivery, in a court of common pleas, orphans' court, and a court of quarter sessions for each county, in justices of the peace, and in such other courts not of record as the Legislature may determine, with civil jurisdiction not exceeding three hundred dollars, and with such criminal jurisdiotion and powers as shall be conferred by law. No court of record other than those herein designated shall be established.

Mr. S. A. PURVIANCE. Mr. Chairman: I move to amend the first section, by striking out, in the second line, the words "in a circuit court." In moving this amendment it will be expected of me that I should make at least a few remarks in support of it. I have made the motion to strike out the words, "in a circuit court," not for any purpose of forestalling any proposition, such as gentlemen may have on the other side, but I make it for the purpose of shortening the deliberations of the committee on this first sec

specified scheme, we should then be called upon to vote on a succession of schemes which might be presented as amendments to the scheme proposed by a majority of the committee, and thus occupy much time before attaining a vote on the main question, whether there shall be a circuit court at all.

In making this motion, Mr. Chairman,

I do not mean to affect or limit the right of discussion of gentlemen on the other side of the question. I am aware of the fact

that the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary (Mr. Armstrong) has matured a scheme and that the distinguished gentleman from Philadelphia, on my left, (Mr. Woodward,) has also matured a scheme; and I here undertake to say, in all frankness, that if a circuit court is to be constructed, I believe those distinguished gentlemen have presented probably the very best plan that could be devised. But, sir, being as I am, wholly opposed to everything in the nature of a circuit court, I am constrained to oppose their scheme, and indisposed to accept any of them.

Mr. Chairman, a circuit court in Pennsylvania is unnecessary. It is asking us to inject into the jurisprudence of our Commonwealth, between the Supreme Court and the common pleas, an intermediate court; and what is that all for? I undertake to say that if you give increased judicial force to your district common pleas courts, you do not need anything like an intermediate court.

I am aware of the fact that gentlemen will say, and probably argue with great force, that this intermediate court is necessary for the relief of the judges of the Supreme Court, who, they will say, (and perhaps it is true to some extent,) are overworked.

There are other plans that may be submitted for the relief of the Supreme Court that, in my judgment, will

not shift the burdens from the Supreme Court upon the shoulders of the gentlemen of the bar of the State and increase the expenses of litigation in the courts. I will say, with regard to the relief proposed to be given to the Supreme Court, there is a plan which I will submit briefly, not because I believe it is the best plan, but one which I think will answer all the purposes, afford relief to the Supreme Court, and at the same time bring about a decision of all the cases which may come before that tribunal in a single year, and that is this:

Let

Instead of throwing this burden upon the people and upon the bar, and increasing the labors and the expenses of litigation,let your Supreme Court be divided. your State be divided into three districts, Eastern, Middle and Western; and let the judges of those districts sitting in banc try their causes, but not promulgate their opinions until they meet in review, say in the month of May, at the Middle district, at Harrisburg, sit in review there, and there decide their causes and promulgate their decisions.

I say that that would give us a remedy, and why? Because all the time that is now consumed by the Supreme Court, which is about six or seven months, is divided into three parts, eastern, middle and western. By requiring the three judges of each district to sit in bane and hear the causes, they will go through their list entirely, and then, at the Middle district, there would be the full force of the nine judges in giving efficiency to the law.

I am opposed to this circuit court, not only for the reason that I believe it is unnecessary, but because I believe it encumbers the machinery of the administration of justice, and how? It provides, in the first place, that you limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court; that no case, unless it is a case exceeding two thousand dollars, shall be taken to the Supreme Court directly from the common pleas.

All between five hundred dollars and two thousand dollars can go into the appellate jurisdiction of the circuit court, and then, when there, there may be a case that may be gotten into the Supreme Court; but how? Why, sir, by the members of the bar in this State crawling at the feet of the circuit judges, because, in the first place, if the circuit court is unanimous in their opinion, that is conclusive, unless a member of the bar who desires to have a review of his case will o from judge to judge until he passes

over the whole eight, supplicating them for a certificate of review in the Supreme Court.

Now, sir, in the first place, look at that. If the circuit judges are unanimous in their decision, it is not likely that there can be a break made in that phalanx. If they are not unanimous, then a party is allowed to go into the court of review; but if they are unanimous, I ask, would there ever be a case taken from the circuit court to the Supreme Court. No highminded and honorable men of the bar would enter the closet of the judges of the circuit court, and consult them one by one as to whether he should have a rehearing in the Supreme Court or not; and yet, sir, he would be bound to do that; and if bound to do that, what is the amount of labor he will have to go through. He will first have to sit alongside of his Honor Judge Woodward, if he were one of the circuit judges, and go over his case from beginning to end; he would have to point out to his Honor Judge Woodward the point upon which he thought injustice had been done him; and after he had passed from his Honor Judge Woodward, he would have to sit down alongside of his Honor Judge Armstrong, for instance; there he would have to go over the same labor, and so with the whole eight judges, and perhaps, at the end of all that trouble, he is denied the poor pittance of having a trial in the Supreme Court. Now, sir, what is the present system? Any gentleman of the bar can sit down in his office without supplicating anybody, and under an act of Assembly regulating the matter, he can draw up his præcipe for a writ of error in the Supreme Court.

Again, sir, with regard to that circuit court, what is it, in my judgment, but a court of delay? It has an original jurisdiction according to this report, and that original jurisdiction is in all cases which exceed in value $500; and it further provides that all cases brought into the court of common pleas, which might have been brought within the jurisdiction of the circuit court, may be certified into the circuit court, and that one of the circuit judges shall once in every year come into each county, if the business requires it.

Now, sir, look at it. Here are forty, fifty or sixty causes brought in the county on claim notes or claims of certain kinds, in many of which there is no just defence, and for the purpose of delay merely they are certified into the circuit

court; and thus in one county, a county of the size of Lycoming, there may be forty or fifty causes certified there. A judge comes there once a year and tries causes for one week. He tries, perhaps, three, four or five causes; the rest remain; they go over, and some of them do not have a trial for four or five years. That is the circuit court as provided for in its original jurisdiction.

As to the circuit provided for in the amendment offered by his Honor Judge Woodward, that provides a different mode, that takes away this original jurisdiction, and in that respect I have to say that I believe it is better than the report of the chairman. In many other respects, however, the scheme presented by the chairman, I think, has the preference.

Now, Mr. Chairman, one or two more words, and I have done. To be sure, it is all based on the idea that the Supreme Court is overworked, and you therefore shut out of the right of review a class of cases, generally speaking, involving only five hundred dollars, because under no circumstances can a five hundred dollar case ever get to the Supreme Court, unless it is through the agency provided for in the report, which is, consulting and courting the circuit judges one by one, unless there should be a divided bench; and here allow me to say, that in the litigation of this State, according to my observation, almost one-half of the cases have been cases involving no more than the sum of five hundred dollars. Now, why should we leave such cases out, why should we deny to such a litigant the right of review, when perhaps all he has in the world is involved, and favor the man who may have a two thousand dollar suit or a

ten thousand dollar suit with the right of

review?

These, sir, are some of the objectionsmany others might be made; and I have made this motion for the reason mentioned. I trust the gentleman on the other side will not think it was made out of any discourtesy. I made it because, when we come to the vote upon this motion, it will settle the question as to whether we are to have a circuit court or not; and then, that question being settled, it will relieve us from the labor of doubly traveling over the ground on amendments to the section specifying different schemes for such a court.

Mr. WOODWARD. I move to amend the amendment by striking out the section of the committee, and substituting a section which I send to the Chair.

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Philadelphia cannot so amend the amendment. Does the Chair understand correctly his proposition to be to strike out the whole section?

Mr. WOODWARD. Mr. Chairman: I move to strike out the section which has been read, and substitute the section I want read.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will remind the gentleman from Philadelphia that his amendment in that shape is not in order. The amendment of the gentleman from Allegheny is to strike out particular words. The amendment of the gentleman from Philadelphia is to strike out the whole section and insert.

that there was an arrangement by which Mr. WOODWARD. I was told last night this whole subject would be ignored. I did not know that it was to be so completely carried out thus early.

The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman Chair? There has been no arrangement from Philadelphia mean to reflect on the The gentleman is mistaken if he means between the Chair and other gentlemen. any such thing.

Mr. WOODWARD. I took the floor di

rectly when the Clerk commenced reading the section, with a view of offering my amendment, the President of the Convention having told me a few minutes before that that was my best form to come at it, but it seems I cannot move it.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recognized the gentleman who he supposed claimed the floor first. The gentleman from Lycoming, the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, has been claiming the floor, and is now entitled to the floor. Mr. WOODWARD. Very well.

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Chairman: I have no comment whatever to make which shall reflect in the least degree upon any course which any gentleman in