New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1846-08-05
NEw.YoRK WEDNESDAY MORNING. AUGUST S, 1916.

he The great oppression OF those who have
suit. in the Courts consisted IN the great delay and
hindrauce there was II obtaining declsion-tD be-
ing obliged TO 20 70 NewIork- 70 Buffalo. 70 Alba
NJ. &c. Two years ago he NJ. Brown had
cause which stood No on the calendar Of the
Court was still undecided-now il was 51ly
No. 10!
He wished 70 provide Clerks OF The Supreme
Court with sufficient salary The system Of pay
rneDts b. fees ought 20 be abolished. He wished
thai he might again behold the spectacle OF
the Judges Of the State descending rom the bench
OF their own Courts and taking IN len thereof. the
situation OF Clerk because they could get larger
income in the latrer place than in the former. He
vas opposed 70 leaving such matters these 70
be settled By the Legislature.
5. He desired 20 see something done toward sun
pliiying the present complicated mode OF pleading
and practice, and hoped that the Convention would
do something
6 The Court Of Chancery has IN itS custody
nearly three millions Of dollars, the property OF
su;tors minors &c Why should not the state
take possession of that money. for the bench, OF
those concerned
Mr. TrLDES.-I do nj know about thai;
Mr. BROWSE that # & person owning proper
t. or entitled 70 it, should die. MS children could
look the State for it, instead OF looking Tor re
dress or for his property, 70 the Clerk OF Chancer
Court II any thing would console q man IN the
decline OF te-were his estate turned into mone!'
it would be that his funds were placed under the
protection-not OF the clerk OF court-but OF TINS
great State.
Mr.. White submitted proposition ike that sug-
gestcd BIZ NJ Brown, 10 which refer your readers
Tile 7Hrcc Millions ,cit5 the Cdalcery Clerks
This morning Mr. MANS of New-York again
brought forwar his excellent, much ceedior and
wcll-timed motion. copy OF which IS published IN
Tie Tribune of July Both, asking for a full account
in detail Of three millions IN the hands OF the Clerks
OF the Courts OF Chancery, showing who they be-
long to. and III what manner these Clerks, &c have
invested them. re rose thrice 10 explain the
grounds OF his motion, which were, first, that the
rernodeng OF the Court OF Chancery was now be
fore the Convention. and Il section ordered 10 be
printed for placing these funds in the hands OF the
State for better security, and taking them from tile
custody OF the Chancery Clerks that. therefore. 1t
was proper that the Convention should know what
these funds were, and III what sort OF securities
they had been invested, and whom they belonged to
in other words how the Court o, Chancery winch
the judiciary Committee propose TO abolish, had
done It's duty. Also that the pubhc-every oody
he had talked with on the subject-dcslred to see
these details and were deeply interested III seeing
them, for they were to pass upon tn; acts OF this
Convention, and had right TO possess the ncces.
sary information TO enable them 10 act understand
mgly
IIh;s was the substance OF argument in favor of the
notion but to ny surprise and regret II Failed
Mr. SIMMONS did not see the necessity OF this in
formation to the Convention.
Mr. BAsCoN agreed with Mr. Simmons in doubt
ing the proprie;v OF asking for this voluminous in
formation-but there seemed to be something wrong
about the floating balances which he wished to get
information upon--the fund was III some districts
81 80 to $4,000 ii others about S-6.0O0--yct he had
some doubt OF the proprcty of calling for II. What
ceuld we do with it il we had II
Mr. MuRfgI presumed that the simple oplecr oi
nfr
1t NAV be very well for the Legislature to inquire.
because as in the case OF unclaimed dividends OF
banks II might enable the right owners 10 obtain
their money OF which they had no knowedee-bLt
he objected to spreading this information now be,
fore the public, merely'to crafty curiosity, and
should therefore move 70 refer the subject to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
This course was ,akcn-no one insisted on letting the
Convention and the People lif, this omillondolar
keeping screen---Mr Mann failed in his object. Mr..
Bsscom limited tina, some of the moneys of suitors was
len, out, and Libraries bought for Chancellors with the
interest, The given for calling for the statement
were ample and satisfactory-never there more
TT time for exhibiting the Convention and the coun'
try what the course OF this Court has been and when
Fee motion made Ike that OF Mr. MrRrHY Gpoa1eey 10
sire The sobg inquiry cHg par Of the coaduc: q
Co, Justly complained Of BY all and defended BY none
suspect that there is something that requires conceal
mcn, applied the Convention Secretaries for leave
to look the details already sen, you-t'ey had no copy
Judge Ruegles had the orginsl-there was no order
10 pr!nt-no newspaper had the facts. Member got
me peep the precious document for few minutes
which partly copied. | believe that Judge Rusg!es
now has the full returns in detail all bm as 10 The nature
fife securities bu. have been told that he is opposed TO
the publication OF any particulars The Conven-
ton asked long ago OF the cases tried and I'M
ied-,hc argued and decided and sundry other
Chancery Judge Ruggles has obtained the
facts but why they printed circulated or on the
journal know not Whatever would show the extent
of Chancerv delays is now wanted alike by the People
and the Convention Judge Rugges said nothing about
these facts neither does MS Report refer to them
now return to Saturdays discussion on jurispru-
dence.
Appeal Court-O' Coaor on Lar and Equity Dis
tinct,onS-Other Opinions.
Mr. O'CoNoR had felt il to be his duty TO present
q separate plan OF Judiciary, on which ne would
make some observations.
HI thought il was proper to elect nearly ali the
Judges OF the Court OF Appeals in the las. resort,
because II convenient TO vest the power OF APP
pointment in the People rather than in any select
body. and he considered that the people might know
sufficiently the fitness ofcandidstes But when We
come 10 the Supreme and County Courts II the latter
be appointed TO examine just our schooiInasters
are selected. not by the people directly, but bya
Committee appointed TO examine candidates. Re
was Tor uphoding, engthening and qualifying the
County Courts doing the greater part OF the buSl
ness OF the State He wished 10 preserve the single
ness and unity OF the Supreme Court, instead OF
cutting tup in many small tragments-but although
he was disposed 10 preserve. IS far as the Judges
were concerned the existing modes OF administering
Justice Vet he far beyond the majority IL provid
ins for radical changes III the administration OF civil
Justice. The Committee had united law and equr
jurisdiction. and some thought that the distinction
would be IN time abolished. !: must be scknow
lodged that il would be desirable 70 abolish the
distinction between law and equity-itis 8 common
saving. that LAW Is ONE THING, and EQUITY or
GOOD conscience ANoTEER,' This very remark IS
written in our present Constitution. and it Will De
in the next also il the Report OF The ,nsjority snail
prevail Although il had been his Mr.. Q Conors
fortune 10 drive trade Ill these metaphysical sub
t!eties Of the Common Law and been able to &c
tend his clients and maintain their interests, under
the. existing system yet he did think AND HAD Al
WAITS THOUGHT THAT THERE WAS No PROPERTY
is THE DISTINCTION RErwEES THESE TWO rRlsu
NAILS, and therefore. WITH THE VIEW OF THEIR BE