“Does this system satisfy litigants?” asked the doctor.
“Much better than the old method,” replied the stranger. “What honest litigant would not prefer to have his rights determined by nine men, who were trained to sift truth from error, who were honest and just, and without other duties to distract them, rather than by twelve men such as ordinarily find their way into the jury box? The judgment of seven out of nine judges will be as nearly right as human conclusions can well be, and people affected by it are better satisfied—even when they lose—than by the guess of a stupid and sleepy jury.”
“Can the courts you have organized attend to all the business?” asked the doctor.
“Easily,” was the rejoinder. “No time is consumed in procuring juries, and much less in objections to testimony. Arguments are abbreviated, and instructions eliminated. In practice, four cases out of five are decided from the bench.”
“Are not the salaries of so many judges a heavy tax upon you?” asked the doctor.
“The system costs the public treasury less than the old one,” was the reply. “Many court expenses are dispensed with, and the expense to litigants is reduced, although the loser is now compelled to pay the fee of his opponent’s attorney, which is fixed by the court.”
“As you have no court of appeals, I suppose no record is made of court proceedings,” remarked the doctor.
“Oh, yes, each court room is provided with one of the new automatic noiseless receiving and printing phonographs.”
“And how about lawyers who have bad cases?”
“They endeavor to take them into the United States Court, where the old practice prevails.”