Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1874-03-25

Iuc court expenses Of the State Of Vermont
rmouut 90 urwardsof ESQ ooOannually.- Bon
Hi1Wol Bdunr
Notaycry good guess. The annual cost to
tas State 6. about $4,000 and if to this
be added Che amount paid by suitors in fees
TO attorneys and other costs, the amount
annually chargoablc to the State and suitors
will be 10 She ncghborhood Of half mil.
lion dollars Here is a grand chance for
reform, and 10 will be well for those who
csrcelio bcl legislators to turn their thoughts
90 tl's subject Little or nothing is to be
saved Iu Che compensation to judges, magis-
tra,ls, jurors, witnesses, aud officers Of the
courts, for en- the whole their pay is not too
much for he services required and rendered
under Che present system One point to be
considered then is whether the Judicial
system canno, bee changed 10 the interest Of
Efficiency and economy bu, the more i'm
portAut aud the main inquiry we think
a5a,d be, whether the humber Of suits
which cucumber Che loclc,s Of the county
aud supreme courts cannot be materially
ancd.
On Chat question wo have in mind a
species Of courts provided in several Of the
countries in northern Europe, called Couris
~ Cancellations This system is simple,
Inexpensive. anl caicicut Our own device
Of arbitration probably was derived from
tba count. Of Cancellation at least, arbitra-
zion and cancellation are, 10 this case con-
sr.ihe 'arm. Adapting the European
y-t.m DO Vermont, we should have three
,1uc.nicfs 81, least. iu each town. all OF
whom, when such can be found should be
good lawyer. We one Of these every per.
30 having complaint or cause Of action
eaI4.t another, must go and state his case.
Ihe c1aei.iato. then cite. ihe defendant to
prcr aud the parties meet the conciiator
ll a'e their case Usually the result
20 settlement 10y mutual agreement Of the
parties but IL not, the conciiator decides
tha case, aud there is 10 appeal except TO
another court Of Cancellation, consisting Of
two oouciliaioss if the plrties agree, other.
Wise Of The three conciliators Of the town.
The parties are again heard, and if neces.
sary the couciiiatoss may inquire of other
witnesses to settle the facts in the case
From the decision Of this court there is no
appeal 1t will be observed that no 1awyers
are employed 10 argue the cases no jurors
to decide the facts; no riiaesses outside Of
the parties, unless the conciliators fud it
necessary, and no derifs or consiaI}es, as
The citations Of the court are informal
verbal OF written. or course the expense
OF lawyers, and sherilis, and jurors would
be wholly saved, aud Of witnesses almost
wholly The ooncliators alone would get
lee-perhaps a dollar. for each party in
an ordinary case, payable by the parties
With such a system, we believe the civil
cases 10 County Courts 10 Vermont would
be reduced much more than one half in
number, and the Supreme Court cases to a
considerable extent while the cost Of the
Courts to the State and ltigants would be
reduced in a still greater degree.
We have indicated briefly the object and
practice Of courts of Cancellation, as aaapted
10 Vermont but it is doubtful how far the
system can be adopted in Vermont, owing
to the exclusion Of jurors If the court of
cancellation is ga court Of la,o," then it is
certain that the parties would have the right
to demand jury. See part FIRST of the
constitution, article xii Bat is such a
court Of Cancellation a" court oflaw in lie.
gal sonse2 Is it not rather Il scheme to
prevent unnecessary law.suits2 In any
event must we not look for a remedy for
the large number ofpctiy suits-often grow
ing ont Of the bad passions of the suitors,-
and for the great expense to the State and
litigations, by eccludiag these cases from,
tle couris2 So much by way Of hints to
olr betiers in legal matters.