New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1851-01-30
The CompIeti ton of the Code No Ill

! which has Dttn dftduN tuHCbcu. ~
this the accomplishment OF all its legitimate re-
suits the remainder should be placed beside y IN
! the statute book. Many parts were necessarily
! left before unfinished these need to be supplied
other provisions are necessary to carry out IN toll
| come of the present and so much OF the OLD iaw
remaining unrepealed, as is not in, harmony with
| the new, should be replaced by other and har
monous provisions.
Upon this point however | desire not 10 be mis-
understood. While / insist upon the desirable
ness and impOrtane Of the additional portions
insist ALSO that the of the existing portion
has been already as great as its friends could nave
reasonably expected. When it is considered tnst
the new machinery has been subjected TO trla
which hardly any thing can stand that II was put
into the hands of wOrkmen, nine'tehtnS ol "noin
disliked IT, condemned it, and predced It's tauure
and that it has nevertheless worked successfully,
in spite Of these workmen, the result must De re-
garded as the highest practical testimony In us
favor.
Indeed, as it now stands, if not another section
were to be added it would every year WORK out
more and more beneficial results IL IS silently
operating to clear the legal profession oil its use
lees and its unworthy members, and 10 raise the
standard of legal education; it has forever clint
mated from legal disputes all those Perplexng,
overcoming and useless questions, respecting
the division into which the controversy IeH'
whether legal or equitable, the form OF the RENE
dy and the technical precision OF the Pleadlngsi
III suOIli IL udn liupiluCuj "a PSNAN~Nt
ened law suits.
But it is not within the scope of these articles
to enter into a discussion OF that portion OF the
code which is now in force. II 1t were, should
be glad of the opportunity to do So ana Cuou5u
have never heard or read an argument against IL
which deserved serious recitation, snouiu IKE
TO enumerate in detail the benefits which have
already flowed from it, 1t may not, however De
out of place, in reference to the general suOJect
to refer to the following letters from Judges OIL
the Supreme and Superior Courts, when having
been written to be used in answer 70 inquiries
from abroad, am also at liberty to use here, ana
which give in fu-in the order In which they
were received uniting only the names o. the
parties to the suits mentioned in the second letter
ALBANY, Nav 3. 1870.
Hon. Dqvif Dadyev Fied-MY DEAR SIR: lake pleasure
in snswerng your favor Of the Gin inst asking my opinion
The subject Of certain inquiries made by Mr. Lougoo-
rough OF Kentucky. -,
regard The uniting of law and equity jurisdictions in the
same tribunal one Of The most desirable OIL modern TO-
FORMS There great difficulties 10 encounter IheIe
was deeply rooted prejudice against breahng up Two
distinct and complicated systems OF practice, WIN walch
all had become familiar; and IL was exceedingly dmcu 10
frame system OF practice applicable TO Oo'h eheles'
The principal obstacle one Of pTacce-not oil primer,
pie for every ready TO concede, that seemed
palpably absurd that Court which was authorized 70 pro.
nounce the law should not have the power to administer
Justice between the parties thnk every DAY hal passes
will increase our surprise, that separation OF Ia" anu
equity ever tolerated. -,
change Much to be uoearned and the system OF prac-
tce 10 be learned must be perfected TINS II WIZ ake
Nods " oONOtnfi'n"- Ia
most respects exceedingly well put together cannot ne
made complete without the aid OF experience IN perecung
tie details But of the ultimate and entire success oil the
change entertain no doubt . -.
the circuits hs many advantages the late pracuce OF
taking proofs in Chancery often try at the circuit III
few houIs equity cause that would have occupied sew
era avs before the Examiner, under the Old system
When The parties before the Court IL easy 10 ascer
Sepce 10 n Having taken tie evidence. and being, OF
course familiar with it, much less time is consumed Ia 'he
Eery few such Causes are tried by Jury The counsel
generally waive jury and try me cause oeGre sne &
But If there is jury the Judge has only TO SUI OUT s rear
question of fact and submit II 10 the form OF question 70
the jury. He then declares what remedies the parties sha
have or the facts adn ited or found. 49, $500.
am, very truly, yours, &c &c AMASA j. rAahEN'
NEw-YoRK, 10th May, 1850
D1rid Dudley Field, Esq.-DEAR SIR: cheeriuly com
NV with request TO give you the result of my ooser.
walton the practical operation OF our blended system OF
law and equity that you may communicate ii TO MrLough-
In he extensive practice which has under my notice
since the gamaiOn, have yet seen no evils arising
from n nor any inconvenience which would not have oc
CURED under the former system In Short nave no hesa
lion in SAYING the change has worked well In the out
set efforts were obtain equitable remedesln cases
TO which they not applicable The minds OF some
members of the bar seemed to be entirely ahoat and was
apped TO for an uuncen by way OF attaching property,
IN suit simply for goods sold but this CONFUSION appsars
The trial o, equity cases by jury great stumbling
block in the of those who were opposed 70 penu3
the sysies after the Constitution had abolished
The Court OF Chancery This mode OF a had been open
TO parties in that Court int quaihed va
n such WIS the repungnAnce Of The bar 10 US use ha
was seldom resorted TO- nothing but compulsory egs
aton, by allowing either parry 10 require IT, couu o'eI
have had occasion recently to try two equity cases with
Jury aud an OF them Will, perhaps, liuslF ave e
system better ihan any sPecu4atSo r;, sa,od
case g. rs @. 4 f.. Nj. 5 -, the compliant stated
yer, lucrative partnership in the manufacture OF gold pens
which, in plaintiff absence ana IN dlrect lolaou VI G
cOpanershD articles defendants dissolved ana eACuueu
plelnuh from he concern m aSsse,s and his damages
ceiyer account and DIVISION OF asets, euu ls
hv reason of the dissolution The injunction was granted
ey qyfe Then motion n dissolve ana cross mo
ZION for receiver The former was uehleu, ana tno re-
ceiver was appointed Meantime defendants ahsWeIeul
ustifype the dissolution by alleged misconduct etc OF
pisnii which they claimed damages and submitting 10
an account judgment m part was entered oy con
sent directing regular accounts TO be TAKEN and dv
sion ode ofhe assets hand Beth OF these were DONE
and a report nude and confirmed - 49, .
The cause was then tried before Jury on the issues as
10 the dissolution and its causes and the counter lot
damages. The trial occupied week, se Iesuteo IA 1
verdict for plaintiff for s. 800 damages TINS enabled Inc
Court 10 give final Judgment wlnang up we IN I
troversy You will observe that under the old system pc
eide the Chsncery suit for The account suit al law Tor e
damages would have been Indispensable . -,
In The other case, W rs. H x NJ, lhe
complaint claimed the right 10 redeem from d Ease
B; the lease having been given 70 ., l9f wnom , ~,
was surety TO pay me REM ana TI 90 n The charge
was that assigned TO H. to secure MN LOT ms surety
ed denying that It as security and averrlng y was
leased 10 B. for benefit &C. SET up BONA hle Puf
Al the iris drew up aud submitted in writing, to the
Jury. slv questions AS 10 being the real lessee 10
the Quiet 10 The assignment being aoseuie OF ~ Sc
H. as 10 MS purchase being ior VSpei anu neA.
without notice, TO alleged offer by w 10 snosutIe
other security the lessor and as 10 WIS damages II W.
were entitled 10 retain the lease. The Jury returned with
consistent and satisfactory answers negsnyng H. de-
Tense sustaining M and estimating the damages al S2i
upon which gave judgment for 81 against the panEh Tor
costs snd for Elsinlf against II. FOR $780, and cost
In this case, under the old mode, several days would
have been spent In the Examiners Office taking esin my
in writing, expense equal half the costs OF the SUIT
and the hearing would have occupied quite az long as Ine
trial did before me, which was less than day. -,
You will recOect our friendly arguments on ne oIenI,
irg OF law and equity procedure and t1at IN those ~
in print opposed the abolition Of the Court OF Cnsn-
Gerry. My plan 10 ingram or oar chancery sys.eh
Trial by jury when required by either Of The parry Hnu .ue
ORAL examination of Witnesses IN all cases, whelhct oeo
Jury or chancellor sm not prepared 10 say, lhaI N
where there separate courts OF law ana equy,
administered by separate judges would recomihe.s
b!eroipR OF the two TIE advantages Of division OF u
oicia business with reference III SUBJECT OF gauOn
founded on established and Itehgb,e modes OF proce
hn shchled and ID our Old system. NEE