New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1858-01-29
FROM BOSTON,.


| From Our Own Correspondent.
Boston, Jan. y, 1e;jS.
| fear have misled your readers who are in
terested in the Ant-Savery movements hereabOuts,
| by representing that our Legislature is moving in
| the matter of the removal of Judge Loring The
people have shown strong disposition to get rid
of him. More than five thousand of Them legal
voters, have sent in their petitions but the Legis
sture, though it has been in session three weeks
has not yet referred them to any Committee. The
House has shown good enough disposition to refer
them, but the Senate has laid them upon the table,
At first the petitions were sent to the Com
mittee on Probate and Chancery, at the
head of which, in the Senate, Mr.
Stone OF Newburyport, and in the House Mr. An
drew of Boston, both Free-Soilers. This Com
mittee, however, seemed disposed TO avoid the
question, probably because TO them had asO been
committed the subject of consolidating the
Courts of Probate and Insolvency. which is the
crooked way of reaching the same object VIZ. the
decapitation Of the Judicial slsve-catchcr. So Mr..
Stone moves i'll the Senate, and succeeds in getting
reconsideration of the vote by which the petitions
were referred to his Committee and the Probate
Committee of the House get rid Of the subject by
recommending that the petitions be referred To
new Joint Committee. The House consents, and
Mr.. Rockwell very promptly appoints his part of
tho Committee, VIZ: Messrs. Churchill of Milton,
Stevels of Lowell, Page Of Cambridge, Arnold of
Northampton ard Parker of Worcester-all but
o1e Of whom Or PAGE are Republicans and anti.
slavery men. Tie order for Joint Committee
went 10 the senate aud since that time nothing has
been heard Of il.
have not been able TO find out what the Pro-
bate Committee intend Ia do with the " soDsolida-
ton" project, but in my opinion they will find more
difficulty in dealing with it than with the naked
question n removing Judge Loring by address.
Every one here understands that the "consollda.
ton" scheme is designed solely as means OF get
ting rid of the Judge by aboishng his Court Ii the
intention was merely 10 place the Insolvency and
Probate business in the hands of tribunal, TINS
would be done by sbolishing the Insolvency Court
(which is mere creature of statute and not of the
COnstitutOn), and transferring its business to the
Probate Courts. But this would not get rid Of
| Lorng, so the Probate Court must also be abo
| ished and II new Cont created. This raises
| constitutional question, for the Probate Judges
claim that their Court cannot he 6bObshed. The
motive for trying 10 avoid the Lor1ng question IN
| this way has been stated in one of the Republican
papers ts be desire on the part Of Gov. Banks for
| "natiOns fame" aud fear that such an act would
"iDure him in the middle States and at Washing
ton" But il is not possible to believe that this
| mode of removing the Judge will make the matter
any better. The whole counrywl understand, what
the whole State now understands that the consol-
idatOn is for the purpose OF getting rid OF The Judge
and for no other purpose.
/ DO not suppose il will make much difference to
Anti Slavery men h0ic Iorng is got rid OF, provided
| he Is made 10 go. A good many Of them would like
| to his court abolished because its abolition
| would undoubtedly BIZ an important step toward
doing away the whole freehold tenure of the Judges,
and introducing an elective Judiciary system. II
the Probate and Insolvency Courts go by the board
for political reasons the Psice Courts the Superior
Court Of the City of Boston snd the Court OF Com
mon Pleas might soon follow, or pollti-
cal reyulsiOn should occur, and then the next step
| would be Ia change the Constitution and make the
| Supreme Judges elective. Foresecng this the
conservative" are already much more exercised
| in mind by the consolidation scheme than they
ever have been by the proposal 70 remove Lsring by
address; ana if the former IN carried out there will
be a camOr against the Republicans from every togy
| throat in the Commonwealth.
| The upshOt of the matter - not unlikely 20 be
that plan Of removing Judge LornS will fail for
| fear Of c.an0r abroad and the other for fear of
| clamOr al hone.
| There are now two vacancies snong the Judges
| of the Insolvency Court sud among the Judges
of Probate The FraDklin County Court OF lns0l-
| yency has had no Judge for soue months. Gov.
Gardner, / is said tried 10 appoint Democrat,
Mr. Lamb II Greenfield: but the Council refused TO
| confirm the nomination. A. n. Bullock, the Wor-
cester Judge OF the same Cour', has re-, gned his
office which considering the fact tlat he, aioretne
considered respectable Wing, embraced Garduer
and Gardnerism for the purpose OF getting IT, is
| quite remarkable. The dcsth Of his father, the
| Hon. Rufus Bullock of Royslston, who has lett
very large property. r. suppose, the cause Of his
resignation. The death Of Judge Kinnlcutt, ot the
Worcester County Probate Court. you have already
| mentioned. 80 Gov Banks viii have several
Judges 10 appoint. whether the consolidation
scheme works or not. The vacancy on The bench
| OF The Superior Court has not been flied, though
Judge Thomas Russell of the Police Court, is sad
| 10 be sure OF II. III, friends are very busy obtain
MS certificates as "a his fitness. Unless Judge
| Nelson OF the same Court. speedily RECEIVERS his
heahh he VIII also feel constrained to resign. Not
| SINGLE appointment has yet been made by the
Governor, and the story goes that h. tell, the I'D
phcants mat he is waiting for instructions from the
| House OF tepTrseniatNes-that is for precedent
| n the removal OF Major Stevens. the Serpcanta,-
Arms But the MAJOR still holds his enemies AZ
hay. The NTH baioting was taken in the House
| Yesterday. ! give you the result of il aud of tue
| four previous votes;
| 1t - - ib r.