Litchfield enquirer., 1878-01-17

arc without the power 70 do it; and so causes On the docket come forward and fall back for want of preparation, # private convenience, sud for the most frivolous reasons. The con- sequence is that the business of the courts lags, drags and accunulates, and half the time of the judges is frittered away and wasted. There were pending in the Superior Court, Common Pleas and District Court at the open ing of the last fall terms, PAS civil causes, on which the entrance and continuance fees alone amounted to $4, BIO for each term, and the at tendance fees to upwards of $1 GOO for every single court day in the year. How shall this evil be corrected? The answer is not so easy. As the best remedy which under the present system l can suggest, though very imperfect one, advise the passage of an act requiring Q) that counsel shall before the close of each term, or within three days thereafter enter in
 a trial docket for the succeeding terms all theil then pending causes intended to be tried at such term, with the privilege of entering thereafter any causes subsequently, brought
 (2l that the judges at each term make from
 suca trial docket such trial lists for days as
 will furnish business to the court; (3) that all
 causes assigned for days be disposed of in their order and without delay, unless continu- cd or postponed for strict cause shown, or ta- ken out of the trial docket or daily list by agree ment, and that any cause so taken out by agreement be transposed to the foot of the gen eraI court docket. Perhapsthe judges already possess this power. If so it will be useful to engraft mandatory duty on the power
 The trial work of the courts has got to be done at some time or other. It can as easily be done in season as out of season, and more easily. There is not one case in fifty that can have just cause for surviving it's second term.
 al ta Oli discreditable to the profession, and hurtful to justice by needless expense, often by the death of parties and witnesses, and always by their failing recollection of facts. A little of system, and of enforced diligence upon the bar, with assisting rules of court for the dispatch of bus mess would in the course of one year, or of two at the utmost, remedy the whole evil, give men their rights in due season, and make the profession more honored, trusted and useful. am jealous of the honor of the bar, to which it is my pride to belong. and ambitious to see our judicial system made a model of excel fence:
 Y LEGAL PROCEDURE.
 beg also in this connection, as tending in the same direction, to call your attention to our system of legal procedure. think it diff fcult for the human mind to invent a more ar tificiaI plan of remedies than those provided by the common law. They are founded some times on absurd fictions, and often on puZzling and metaphysical subtleties, which are, not seldom, the despair of both the bar and the bench, and in the midst of which justice often miscafTies The system has some merits, but it serves too often only to cudgel the brains of lawyers and entangle the rights of parties.
 Our plan of judicial proceedings is borrowed from the English law It has been freed from time to time by the decisions of courts, and by occasional legislation, from some of it's clogs and trammels; but it is still cumbersome, in convenient and fruitful of delay and expense. In England, they have at last, under the lead of the best lawyers of the kingdom, cut up the system root and branch, and reduced the mul- tiplied and complicated remedies of law and equity to the most direct and simple forms. The same work has been done in part, but less boldly, in several of our sister States. This work. if attempted here, must be done with a wise moderation and with the utmost care and It requires the best legal ability of the State.
 recommend that commission be raised to take this matter into consideration, and, if they think it expedient, to report to the next Assembly a bill for the simpliication of our system of legal procedure, and for the more speedy administration of justice. There IS no use of scratching the skin where incisien and surgery are needed.
 f l CHANGE OF PROBATE COURTS.
 ', Our system of probate courts is in myjudg- ment, radically defective. Our probate dis tricts, originally limited to counties, have been one after another divided and sub-divided, un- til they are now one hundred and twelve in number, and large part of the towns-some of them with little more than one hundred vo- become separate districts. The re- suit is that probate administration has fallen, to large extent, into the hands of judges un- in the law and inexperienced; the files and records are not only badly kept, but kept on wheels shifting from house to house and store to store with each election ofjudges, exposed to loss, mutilation and fire, and, in the necessary absense of the judge at his daily business to fraudulent alteration. How sense less and hurtful this system is must be evident when one considers that all the property of the State passes and repasses every twenty-five or thirty years under the administration of these courts that the estates of minors, wid- ows and orphans and large and complicated trusts are under their jurisdiction; that some of the most subtle and difficult legal questions are involved in the adjudication, and that an error necessitates forits correction long and eX- pensive proceedings in appeal, a re-trial in the Superior Court, and often revisory proceedings in the Supreme Court.
 In my judgment there should be but one probate court in county, with circuits if re- quired. It should have power to finally de- termine (with jury when necessary all ques- tions of fact, subject only on errors of law to the revisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court This would, in the first place, secure judges of known ability and experience; next, vastly expedite the settlement of estates and lastly relieve the superior courts of a multitude of probate appeals which now cucumber their dockets. In every other State in the Union the jurisdiction of these courts is limited either by county lines or circuits Rhode Island only excepted, our estimable neighbor, which has suffered itself to be triturated, possibly for our warning, into as many probate districts as there are towns in the State.
 What is the objection to the change? The from expense and inconvenience is futile: CD From expense, because if the diff erent probate courts in 8 county were merged in one, the tariff of fees might easily be reduc- ed one-half or even more (2) from inconven- ience for all actions at law on claims ot more than $100, though these involve-as cases in probate ordinarily do not-the attendance of a large number of jurors and witnesses are tria- ble only in courts of county jurisdiction. Then in addition to this, single repository of pro- bate titles at the county seats would be more accessible to the general public, and the rec ords be better guarded, systematized and kept than under our present system, which exposes the files and records of 112 courts to biennial migration, 112 judicial apprentices to biennial removal to make way for novices, and leaves the greater part of their offices deserted for the greater part of the year, with judges in their fields or at their merchandise.
 Irecommend that the Legislature make the changes above indicated or, if the subject re- quire more consideration, that it be referred to the commission before named for examination and report.
 For myselfI regard all these reforms in our judicial system as very needful and urgent I know they will, if carried out greatly simplify expedite and cheapen the administration of justice, and be productive of the very best re- suits. We have outgrown our old swaddling clothes and bandages It is time we had sloughed them off
 ,a RMBEZZILMENT BY TRUSTEES.
 think it my duty to call your attention next to the necessity of further legislation for the protection of trust estates.
 Under our present law, the agent of any in- dividuals private corporatiOn or common car