, 1875-10-17
"THE COURT OF REC0NCILIATIoH.n


| two assistants. The latter are usually moi
members Of the legal profession Before
! these courts every case must come. The reg
ular courts will dismiss any suit which has
not been brought before one Of these. The
parties appear in the Reconciliation Couri
without aoounse1, and generally without
witnesses. Each states his case in the
presence of ths other. The presiding
Judge asks any questions be chooses and e1-
anime witnesses, if he sees fit to do so. When
complete statement Of the dispute has been
made, the Judge explains the law and tells
the parties what he thinks their strict legal
rights are. Then the whole Court unites in a
recommendation to plaintiff and defendant to
settle the dispute in q certain specified way.
It is entirely optional with either to reject
this advice. If they accept it, the suggestion
Of the Court becomes Judgment Execu-
ton may issue upon it, and it can be pleaded
in bar Of any other suit upon the same sub
ject matter. But if both or either of the
parties should reject the profered advice, the
suit can be at once brought in the proper
courts.
These are the main features Of the system,
as we find them slzetched in forgotten book,
The Study Of Government" written by
Mr. g. q. YEAsfAN, and published in Boston
four years ago. The preface is dated at Co.
penhagen, SO that this account Of the Danish
system was probably written on the spot and
as the result Of personal observation 11r.
YEAMAN gives some remarkable figures in
proof of the good work done by the Courts
of Reconciliation. Within the five years
from 1850 to 1864, both inclusive, 1873, ,6o8
suits were brought before these courts. Of
these, 123, 1897 were settled; 2,5H were post
poned aud 81, 1877 were sent up to the regu-
lar courts for litigation. But sober second
thought led to the adoption Of the advice Of
the Court Of Reconciliation in more than
half Of these, so Tint only 1857 Of the 1888 ,e2s
original suits were really tried at law. In
other words, the Courts of Reconciliation
promptly, fairly, and eheaply disposed of six
cut of every seven suits brought in Denmark
within these:fve years. By comparison Of
The statistics Of the individual years, it ap-
pears that the whole number Of suits de-
SAC<aooo Coz - ,Lo~13 "AAo s1Ao FAoEoA t4oA1 VA
suits finally settled in these Reconciliation
Courts as steadily increases
The system is in full force in the Danish
West India Islands The following table
shows its results there during the same five
years (19G0-1964):
Total number Of caaes.....-........... 4Gs
Settled in Reconciliation Courts
Sent to regular courts. s03
fr,a +Tia Ha1
In these colonies the Courts Of Reconcilia-
ton settled seven out Of every eight suits.
The two sets of statistics, taken together, are
in the nature Of cumulative proof.
These facts should have been before the
public long ago, hut the legal guild, which
ought to be aware Of every Interesting legal
experiment, is dense1y ignorant, as rule, Of
everything outside one narrow routine. B1AcK-
STONE was right when he classed lawyers as
obstructives. They have to be told by other
people Of the progress made in their own
profession. The Consei1s des Prudhommes
Of France, the Arbitration-Courts of England
and New York City, and the Courts of Rec
onci1iation Of Norway and Denmark, were III
and founded by nonlawyers and
If the lawyers had been left to find out about
them the world would probably still be
ignorant of their existence.