The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1869-10-31
THE NEW JUDICIARY ARTICLE in THE NEW
CONSTITUTES.


state was recently held In Albany, and an address
issued urging the adoption Of the judiciary article Of
the proposed constitution. This article Is to be voted
upon separately from oil other questions. To vote
for he amended constitution" Is not to vote for
To vote against the amended constitution is not to
vote against it. The proper ballot is 'For or
'Against' the amended judiciary article, and no
will be counted upon the question OF Its adop
tion In the address OF the bar IT is said:-
The judiciary article by It's direct provision
relieves the grand defects and many others IN the
existing system. Let us adopt It because II Is the
best now attanable, ana let US Improve 1t hereafter
when the necessity OF further Improvement shall
become apparent II we Ia to adopt 1t there Is no
hope OF change or improvement for many years TO
are always very great. II oil men could agree on
another plan 1t would take years to put 1t III force.
But such an agreement Is hopeless. No two persons
are ever agreed as TO the best plan Of Judiciary
in its different details. 1t Is possible that better
article than the one now proposed might be framed.
But we discover IN II plan carefully adjusted to
admitted wants wise adaptation to existing public
sentiment, wise adyodance Of extreme opinions
fundamental and judiciary reforms.
In the proceedings OF the meeting which issued
this address we recognize the names Of many lead.
ing democratic and republican lawyers and judges
from oil per,s Of the STATE. Among them are the
names Of William M. Evarts, Amasa J. ParEer, Ira
Harris, Francis Herman, william A. Wheeler, George
r. Comstock, Joshua N. Van Cott Judges Peckbam,
subject Of judiciary reform lies peculiarly within
the domain OF professional knowledge and expert
ence. The opinion, therefore, Of leading lawyers and
prominent judges may well be accepted as the best
guide for opinion and the best rule of action. We
find great unanimity OF sentiment on this subject
among those most competent to Judge, and outside
OF the professional and judicial ring, which
better Judiciary and would prefer worse one, II
We concur most heartily in the views Of the bar,
and we trust that the electors win make the dis
rttYiin aftann n
the constitution by casting separate vote 1or
the Judiciary article. This measure was the work
the ablest aud most judcious lawyers and Juriss
OF the State in the Constitutional Convention. We
find II most carefully and thoughtfully considered
tremes Of sentiment and opinion, yet embracing
maly fundamental changes winch have been long
required and cannot well be longer postponed.
We have about the worst judiciary BY stem In the
whole world. Our Jurisprudence, which once held
the first rank has sunk nearly 10 the lowest. One
OF the grand defects In the existing system is the
weak, 1uctuatng and utterly absurd organization
OF the Court OF Appeals. One half Of its members
years. years. As the court is constantly changing and
uncertain, so Is the law. This IS unavoida-
pee o OF 80 o9nsnten where men
cilable tendencies, meet and separate In rapid
cesslon The decisions OF such court cannot COM
do not. It is, moreover, o necessity OF such an
organization to work with intolerabe slowness.
Look at the condition OF Its business. Suitor5 ap-
peang to 1t for justice must wait more than 1ve
years, and the evil is on the increase. This depora
bic situation In the Court ol Last Resort Is reey ed
by the new article. rapid disposition OF the i'm.
mense arrearage OF pending causes Is provided for
and new court is Instituted with steady, perma-
nent and efficient organization. Uniformity, vigor
and despatch Will take the place OF chaos weakness
and intoerable delay.
The proposed article also strikes with unerring
accuracy at the evil most elt and most complained
OF IN the Supreme Court. That evil is the strictly
distinct and local character OF the socaed general
terms or courts OF appeal from the decisions OF
single judges. In these local or district courts
three or four judges elected IN the judicial
dl1frfn t oft I'm nf ntl onh
others original orders, Judgments and DEGREES.
All this has become an abominable nuisance-a
stencil In the nostrs OF the bar and the people. The
right OF appeal from q decision or order, however
outrageous Is worthless under such system. II
you appeal you meet on the bench the very Judge
who has decided the matter against you. You have,
therefore, no resource except to pay the required
Precisely ont OF this condition OF things has sprung
the irresponsible judicial tyranny which has become
source OF terror and alarm to capital to property
and business The new article strikes at the root OF
the evil by deprivlng these appellate courts of their
local character by providing more general and
permanent organization, and by sweeping and
peremptory clause which declares that no Judge can
ever sit IN any court In review OF q decision made
by himself. THIS single clause viii reinaugurate
the law In place OF discretion caprice and avorltism
and will enecually checkmate the power OF cliques
and rings. Give an instantaneous appeal TO
well-constituted court where there is no prejudg
ment of the case; where no Judge can sit who has
already decided It, and then no wrong can be done
without prompt redress luis Is precisely the best
means Of preventing wrong.
We are surprised that an earlier and more
thorough consideration has not been given to the
ful vote has been organized IN this city for The de-
clared and avowed purpose OF thwarting reform
which gives us ample phases OF purer and better
administration OF justice. Our advice to the people
rally on the right side Look to your ballots, and
vote "for the Amended Judiciary Article"