New-York tribune., 1871-11-15

nan and viii SVe yoa allowance Of q per cent"
An oPuuoN or THs sTsTsN.
An sytle,e On aThs JndioiAry OF KSs5XQrkC fsr 80
d.bed n Ths Nora An~tOsa RssisSt taH, ~. aiIk-
lnr Of the reference business, end pa fulA# JhfEe
BSsnArds oOnnOOton Herewith, pa9bi l\si.sJ (l\
"The reference business had 6e6n 96ssdle GAMER
sSl eSss % s HeE .GSa ~ sss but
ssSs SRs iesS e 3 q Sss%sG g. 4.s e
ana always sSat ~ sSSSy = E1rSFthi enough
Ss4gsy& w % sE9SS 1iesH'f Ssrils: =:
upOh other Haues da p6t help the matter
1aS SsS nIsHiR' rs sSS W. gSs sSS2 .std
repested G@endms9ts q the law. aimed directly g
eoEEss cSnsIit.tsd q geAroUi t6s rsfsre1cSs m
SSs NJ S eay aa SS sysls saSSa anaeKSstad sn
Es1glv ~ dssgafoeI q hs nSrlhhtiOns; -
ooe 1sfs hesdSd 46s PefgrS e 81 iREsrcst n theSe
mon8 81 b1t oHy fsT are ssqG5nd
WITH taot! sufelspt y enable thSR to form depA'e
77'F -,1a' JUDICIAL REcPRoenY.
The Illnltas4ons fmposed BY the Jealousy Of other
JudeeA, alluded 70 IN the shove qhotsfion. w1n %
rosAily uDdsrstoodby the kenetal reader. IL - kO"n
tOlsWyers that q system Of reclprocaf exehanse y
rsSess & besh long pracoed BY sueh Of the judges O.
took mart in this nefarious business II any DOUBT YET
exists q to the nature Of the bagnns MADE
them, illustration or two WHO sumc'o"s S0"4 -
When tho q ES%st.S .Ss sSapsst ne
vSsSaS parties Thereto applied % Judse Insaha1m ISr
ths q sGpGssT sSS,tS. ss rsts5 ssRS 9G R
such sPpontnen The CSaT sCOs the Psgsrs 1P md
Whenthe parties Hgen spT tSS 10 - ~ IN
Ss mann 2 seRSsGss SsSssd sss y
rnSrd T6e record In ta case Il On 1ls thS County
Clerks Office . .G,f.L. i,I o.. 4 u A.,
rS. AHStSsT o tSs SeTs psTtS sF for az prec but the
particulars O whoh hayebos devn frStn Trustworthy
and OF me cpdity Of men vi should nom tnelr posi-
Tue 0arteS to GeT ain foreclosure mdt, involving but
small amount Of money. spplied to Eentlemen yho
hSTa hsH Snd ssF tie fact Of s
the tfing nature OF the case obtaned his S91sSpt 20
ss sGs e spSS%:ht 5SSfSS l ey S presed pa
with the consent to Judge M s & sSC pspoT
on his Ges s1T h % SPa SS sS
from be was aceosted 81 tbs AttoEpeys With the inquiry
h SsS tSSS sSs p Il b they Vou
66d Il iii right when the parties came IN the Iornns
With tSs name of tie persop seSd % erased and the
name y = InSs@& az r. %sSTssS astesa inst SS 1ss 1aS
= aGt rsteEes end h. tseHF nEELoTee
aSs pSIG w9 bS SGSS thst SS appointment Of
D. PingrahAn, IT, was not his and t1ae he asd signed
ham II Is said that tho referee whose appoi1tment was
reaaestsd would have chsrFed but q for his services,
whole duty 10 this 70 compute the amount due
from the date q hs & last p payment YIN s ,s inst
cited were before the Court there wAs an agreement
ssS sbpS pSg' R e iaS aSS % and the
sanus Jones who was i those days only 6rat: him
Of the superior Court acquired tho privilege Of having
GratseS Of bis own.
THE ExrouTIoN PRAcuoED.
But the appointment Of these referees was not
the only grievance Of which counsel had to complain
The regular fee charReable by law % sitting Its
true that the parties do frequently to pay referees
larger fee sometimes high sNlo sitting But even
at ths rate the amount Of their fees on the conclusion OF
snor@Ss G sans Which have been wrune protecting
clients % STS oi baS sSssS SsSPS Is "Rss cSe
reference continued through nye years; v Which lisa Is
week which also unusual and fee Of $40 Per sitting
we're allowed, the sum total would not exceed tasOe
by parties acng referee by the consent Of counsel
sS @ S 'SS doubt that 81 tn the SsS
both client and counsel would have received RrSReS
@ Sy Ss GSp % Sv the n PssToS
dependent upon the dsCreon Of the judge Who appoints
thaa to three per cent upon the value But in
many INSTANCES referee has been the crea
tSS STsS O. I e VIII hSs be seen that tbs shameful exOfon
can only DO pfaOtced by the oonniVance OF the court
Tue inference is plain.
AProRnoHMBNTs IN VIOLATION OF Law. |
By reference TO tho Revised ststutes It will be seen
that written Of the pres requisite before &C.
tions can be referred, except where question OF TACT
shall arise other than upon the peadings Yet is
charged that where no such question has ariSen ques
tons have been rumped up by judges IN order TO bring
cases within the statute and enable them 70 be sent
Tiapss above named The Code SEQ S provides that
if the parties do not agree to referepGe the court
srspiio and no person shall Te appointed referee to
whom ali the parties in me sctOn Object eTSsGs IN SS
choose their referee and shan Be ordered
70 him. ana 70 no other person Ana no ReTS0n @ S snS
object until ten persona shall hsYe been severaly gug
ToViSions Of the law and yet scarcely lawyer can be
one t ~ So nave not personally suffered injustice by
the arbitrary violation OF these rroysion and yet 30
S,ssa SS8 10 SceSstomsd have lawyers become to the
tyranny Of what may justly be called mob law since the
sbat they awoGld rather bear the ills they
have than fly to others that they know not
S Ssss to oSS speak SS on tie subject Stss q their circle
Individual rights have ever been thus ranpled upon,
tbSsh s assert the existence Of the abuse As an In
SSTcS 10 ~ wS Who Il was said on trustworthy
antSorty had been selected referee in case, and
'.as wSsn y ~ boS SsG dss % his sppCnfsn his was
sr~sed from the SHat" and the name Of "Gratz''
d insSS s YET S 'RS when ''s &c Writer asked rrSs
lawyer for the particulars Of the case, he denied
WoT injustice has bean done in any case by the
IO Gos does nS know it, Sd iS2 SSa
S sSsy naa y t Why do not lawyers mast on
t9 % Sad Ss r. T ss xoNd Ssy seS sGS q YOU
tAeerd Jadg Barnard say myIsn open court 81 tst
- - soaid mshs them ali rioR By refeienoesp -.
S'WhAt tbs occasion that called forth such re-
Ali now" returned the lawyer, yo0, arc going e
msE!.sw me- decline e have my Ha%s S eSnHsetsS Sssta
hGSsS ID S1oh way that my eisnts tghte IC1d Se i
1sFisd . every court T. Say nothing OF tAe eolse-
HgseSt All desire Is the title and dnte Of case
~ ne e te p1Sy sslsSssa e. referee ana tAe name
@ GLS~{s But dOe9 EnOg Of suy: IhAvs heard Of