Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1860-02-10
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 40, 1850.

In another column will be found the report
ed decision of the Supreme Court in regard to
the jurisdiction in this County of the Judge OF
Insolvency for Hampshire County. 1t will be
seen that the jurisdiction of Judge Hodges in
this County is declared to be without validity,
because the statute supposed to authorize it
did not provide for a vacancy in the office OF
Judge of Insolvency. On the same ground,
all his proceedings in Franklin County were
illegal. He rendered service in that County
during vacancy of nine OF ten months, ana
the confusion there must be somewhat extern
sive. What the Legislature can do to ProVlde
a remedy, is not very clear 1t is hkey 'n"'
something will be attempted; and II IL pfo,e'
to be something effectual which can S'aiu INC
rigid ANALYSIS and "strict construction IL Is
snre tn encounter in the Courts, many Will re-
;o;oo Rpt is any such remedy possible?
We suggest this case as very suitable ana
nroftabe study for the Legislature, and also
for the Executive. The trouble that has arts
en- is due chiefly to careless and imperfect leg
isaton, and to unnecessary delay in filling the
vacancies that had occurred i'll the Office of
that office vacant in Franklin county nine or
ten months nor even for one or two months,
the duration of the vacancy here. 1T the great
importance of making the appointments inn
medately had been as clear then as it has be-
come since the decision of the Supreme Court
was declared, it is nowise likely that such de-
lay would have been allowed. AS to the stat
ute, it seems to us clear that an omission to
provide for the case of vacancy was not in
tended; but the work oflegislation was not care.
fully and thoroughly done. The omission Of
the word vacancy" was, we belive, merely a
clerical error. 1t has been supplied in the
new revision of the statutes. If the evil that
has resulted from emitting it in the first place
leads to more care and completeness in the
work of legislation, something will be gained.
1t would be great blessing to the Common
wealth if some influence could work effectual-
ly in our legislatures, to hinder the enactment
of any law Tor which there is not an actual and
pressing necessity, and to prevent frequent
changes in the statutes already in existence.
There is never legislature without somebody
tinkering of the statutes ,-somebody who
deems it of the highest importance to make
one change here, another there, and several
more yonder. The good of the Com
monTealth would be promoted, if all such
men could be expelled the moment their
vicious propensities become apparent. The
circumstance that any statute might be
more perfect in form or more complete in ex
preston, is not sufficient reason for changing it
hastily. But most of the changes 30 OIL
ciously proposed are not improvements.
1t is very likely that our first experience of
the new revision of the statutes will not be
wholly free from embarrassments. 1t will be
surprising if we do not at first hear of great
many imperfect writs and processes. The
trouble with the writs upon which Mr.. Stone
has been held, was occasioned by change in
the statute. Blanks that were all right 1855,
had become antiquated in 1857, in consequence
of an amendment of the law, and required
considerable revision and Interpolation. Hence
the imperfections alleged. If there are not
great many similar imperfections to trouble
those who may have occasion to bring actions
in the courts, before we all get fairly accus-
toned to the new revision of the statutes, there
will be reason for men to congratulate them
selves and praise the lawyers