The Struggle for King County's Fourth Judge
A chorus of lawyers and officials debate if the growing city's court system requires an additional judge or simply more efficiency.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
The question of a fourth superior court judge for King County is being actively discussed by the members of the bar, as a bill for an additional appointment is now before the legislature. A petition for John Wiley is circulating, and John Arthur is also urged for the place. However, there is significant debate over the necessity. Proponents like Joseph Shippen argue that the law's delay works great injury, forcing litigants to abandon just claims. County Clerk W. B. Spencer notes the judges are holding frequent night sessions with little rest. Conversely, Judge Richard Osborn argues that if matters were systematized—recognizing that half the cases on the calendar will never be tried—three judges could handle the load. Judge Thomas Burke remains undecided, noting he has been too busy moving to form an opinion.
“One of the great evils to the business community, here as elsewhere, is the proverbial law's delay.”
This 1891 debate over court capacity and the 'law's delay' mirrors contemporary concerns about Seattle's judicial backlog. Even then, the tension between needing more public resources and skepticism over administrative efficiency was a cornerstone of civic discourse.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.