The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1878-03-18

phasizc the inherent faults in the bill Itself.
We desire now particularly to notice what
itsays of the attempt made in the supple
mental portion of tho new code to Abolish
the present restrictions on the pccunlary
patronage of the courts.
This ncw part Of the code would not only
remove the two-thousand-dO!ar Limitation
ON allowances in tine Supreme Court, but
would also dangerously Increase the power
of Surrogatcs to award sums by way OF
rnets. According to section 1858. the Sur
rn.,atc may. IN his discretion, allow to
rnrtv in n contested case a sum equal To five
,cr cent upon the amount or value OF the
estate or fund in controversy. II there is u
discussion Of the veto mcssagc'in the Lcgis-
lnturc, We hope 1t will bc made known who
devised this extraordinary grant of power.
Tho Commissioners to revise the statutes
cannot I've held responsible for It, When
they reported the new code IN 1871 1t con-
tanned section, 3,25l, the effect OF which
was to make two thousand dollars the high
est allowance possible in any court. When
the bill reached the Governor, this section
had been removed. We use the word rc-
moved adviscdlv. for the appearance of the
ton were carefully erased with an crasing
instrument. Some explanation rs To THIS
method of amending bill in committee or
elsewhere would be cmincntly proper The
fact that IL was rcsortcd to only confirms
our opinion that the measure was known
and intended by many Of its supporters.
particularly those from this city. TO be
cover for n vicious scheme OF vast allow
anccs resting in the discretion of judicial
officers
We agree entirely with Gov. ROBINSON
that the whole system of discretionary al
luwanccs is wrong in principle and ought to
be- abolished. Its Immediate and total all
rugatinn would hc n benefit TO courts. law
ycrs. and litigants. II every particle of judi
cial patronage could DO swept away to-day,
It would be better for our Judges Some
plan ought to hc devised for the appoint
mcnt ~ referees and receivers which should
make the selection independent of the choice
OF a Judge That ii Is gCt impracticable to
do this il indicated by The system OF rOta-
ton IN the United States District Court, un-
der which bankruptcy cases as they arise
are sent TO the several registers In success
sion.
! lection Of these chapters ~ the new code.
that they thus conferred such arbitrary
! power to impose enormous costs. But any
one Of the other objections raised 10y the
message j. sufficient; and all taken together
condemn the measure beyond recall.
! We must now take one step further in the
! cause of law reform, and repeal that part OF
thr new code which went into operation last
| year. II * cumbersome. and IL wcarcs the
legal profession and the courts with it, use
less formality and infinite detail. II OLE
structs the trial and determination uf causes
by giving rise to lnnumcrablc questions OF
practice which have TO he argued and dc.
cidcd In this way the progress Of litiga'
ton. which ought to be- simple, swift, ano
economical, is made complex, slow. and cost
ly. The plain remedy il the immediate
restoration Of the old code the supcriorii!
Of which. in all essentials has been ampl!
demonstrated by the experience OF the pas
six months.