The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1877-02-07
The So-CaIicd Reform of the Marine
Court.

The So-CaIlcd Reform of the Marine
Court.
bill ostcnsibly TO abolish the Marine
Court but really to continue IL under
another name and with new Judges, Is now
before the Legislature. II may, perhaps, be
| best described as bill to abolish the pres
ent Marine Court Judges. The formal abol
| tion OF tho existing court Is provided for,
| but substantially the same jurisdiction as II
exercises Ia conferred upon new tribunal
whose Judges are to be elected at an early
day.
| measure like this should be scrutinized.
| There may be deception In the cry Of reform
| with which IL is hcraldcd In this case, we
are disposed TO think there ia. No one
doubts the necessity OF n court here which
shall have limited jurisdiction and speedy
procedure. such as the Marine Court was in
tended to possess under its present organ
ization. We believe, also, it is the general
opinion of lawyers that advantageous
changes might be made in the powers and
methods Of that court. This BILL however,
raises the question whether we should de-
stroy the whole existing fabric and make a
new one in order to bring about few
needed improvements.
Now, what are the substantial propositions
which it involvcs2 First, to change the
name from the Marine Court OF the city Of
| New York to the City Court Of New York.
This is needless. The court has been known
by it's present name more than half cen
tury, and that name indicates the oldest and
most characteristic feature of its jurisdie-
ton, which relates to mariners contracts
and wrongs toward seamcn. Again, the now
name will cause confusion. Ono Of the
Judges Of the Court of General Sessions,
criminal court, Is called the City Judge; and
we should have four other City Judges with
purely civil functions.
A second proposition of the bill Is 10 de-
crease the number Of Judges from six tn
four and to do this by formally abolishing
the Marine Court, go IA 10 turn out the pres
ent incumbents, and clecting four Judges of
the new City Court in their stead. Unless
the public interest impcratively requires it,
there Is something in the moral instincts Of
most men which rcvots against thus GUST
ing public officers before the expiration Of
the term for which they were elected by the
votes OF the people. The reduction, II dcsir-
able, could bc accomplished more deccntly
by providing that no Successors should be-
chosen to those two members of the court
whose terms shall next expire But why has
the conclusion SO suddenly been reached that
six Judges are too manyf We are told they
are constantly ut work. Yet the business OF
tho court has increased beyond thoir capac-
ity to do it.
The proposal to reduce the salaries OF the
Judges from $4,000 TO $500 is likely TO bc
received with more favor than 1t really
deserves Now $4,000 is not too much
to secure the services of such men as
ought To sit there. But oven II IL Is, must
we abolish the court In order TO reduce the
salaries II is said we must, because of the
rule which prohibits tho diminution OF n
Judges compensation during the period for
which he was appointed or elected; and to
avoid a violation Of the letter Of this rule n
court is to be formally abolished and then
substantially restored, thus plainly violat-
ing its spirit. Reduce the salaries as much
as Is cxpedicnt but let the change apply
only to such Judges as shall hereafter be-
chosen. The reduction Is demanded in the
name Of economy; but is the expense of a
new election to go for nothing? Offset that
against tho saving in salaries, and how
much will the people have gainedi
more economical administration OF the
clerks office, by giving fixed and moderate
salaries, and having tho fees all paid into
the sinking fund, are unobJectionable. These
should be applied however, not to u new
tribunal but to the existing court.
Finally. the plan is to deprive tho court Of
all appellate functions; that IL, to have 1t
devoted solely 10 the trial Of cases, instead
. H.. 81
sit as General Term and hear appeals as at
present An appeal to the Court OF Com
mon Pleas, however, is still to be- allowed.
This change deprves suitors Of an intermc-
date appeal. They must go directly from
the trial court to the Common Pleas, which
Is the highest court they can reach at all,
unless under exceptional circumstances
The ablost jurists, however, favor courts Of
intermediate appeal. and after much dis
cusson and deliberation, they were retained
in the recent reorganization Of the courts in
England.
Other wcighty objections might be urged
, To this bill Prominent among them are
the legal complications which almost in
evitahly follow the attempted transfer
Of jurisdiction from one court to another
, IT. seems To us that the real object Of
the whole measure is to enable some po-
litical party to GUST the present Judges OF
the Marine Court and allot their places by
, way Of patronage to new asprants to tho
2 bench. We are led to this conclusion by the
/ fact that every desirable Improvement in the
, constitution of the court or its procedure
, can be- as we'll brought about without any
such removal The plan s carefully dis
guised in the mask Of reform, but has very
, little true reform in it.
Some day New York is bound TO bo made
the capital Of the State. II il inevitable Why
then. 20 on sinking millions in the preposterous
pile now slowly going up ut Alblny2 The
Legislature had better give their attention "a
discussing bill for tho early removal of the
, capital to It's natural place. Albany. before tho