New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1881-11-11
THE B4R ASSOCIATIONS RESPONSIBILITY

The Committee on Judicial Nominations of the
Bar Association must share w;h tue County DE,
mocracy i'm the disgrace Of the election OF Mlchael
Norton a9 Civil Justice IN the lSt District. Inns
c,,,uittce was amounted for MOTH else than to
prevent such results. Everybody knew that TINS
man Norton one of the most ulht ana unworthy
me, Who hal sought judicial honorS in this city for
many wears Every member OF the committee must
hlyr Known also. long before he was formally nom
mated. that he was 10 DE candidate. INC Iact was
published broadly that he bad adjourned MS con
y,utlon until after the meeting oil the bar
Association for no other purpose IMAM TO
avoid. By pretecnc that ne was
not candidate an uniavorable aci ION by that as
ISOLATION. Then he was nominated on the same
evening that the Bar Association met. on the DAY
before Air. Everett p. Wheeler. the c hartman OF
TIE COMMITTEE and prominent member Oh IN. tle
County Democracy was asked what the committee
was going to DO with norton. lie Sha nc ulu ,,o1
understand that Mr.. Norton waSa candidate. MI
Nortnu's Ian of conducting his canvass was ue-
tailed 10 Mr. Wheeler II WAS well known III the
smallest political circles. But Mr.. w hteier was
much surprised. lie said that lt would be great
misfortune to have a man like Norton on the Oench'
and with many thanks for the information he prom
iscl to bring the matter before the comlntttee
the next day. Bat when the cominittcc Drought
i'm their report IN the evening the name or
Norton was not even ment ned. There was praise
Tor all the othcrjudicary nominations OF the County
Democracy and for some Of the Republicans. But
MIR Norton WAS included with Mr.. Hyatt, one Oh the
Republican candidates for the Marine Court, anu
Surrogate Calvin III the list oil those whom the COM
mittcc saw tit neither To approve nor condemn ,
MIR Wheeler, after reading the report was asked
&" IIoy about Norton - and his reply was that as
Norton had not been formally nominated by any
convention. tho committee had not thought 1t
propcr 10 take any acton Ii was ef Tor one OF the
Youngest members of the association to offer the
sperigl resolution cOmdemning Mr.. Norton
There was no voice raised against the
resolution. not even by the chairman or
mcmbers of the committee. But nothing
more was done 10 prevent the mans election: Ana
doubtless there was another surprise for MI heeler
when he awokc the next morning and found that at
thc very hour when he was reading his report the
the Convention of the County Democracy IN the
LIST District. with enthusiasm and unannnlty, was
naming Michael Norton rs its Judicial candidate.
The appointment of this committee OF the bar AS,
sOciation was doubtless made III good faith ana
| with the hope, on the part of many intelligent
| LAWYERS that it would have marked effect IN rem
| deriug impossible the nomination ana election OF
improper and unfit judges. Even aside from the ques-
on of the candidacy of Norton it cannot he SAID that
! il realized these hopes. But when ali the clrculn-
stances of that case considered II seems untOr
tunote that il ever undertook the work at all. FOL
the consequt noes must be penlcous to the extent
Mt all events of the influence of this organization
| of lawyers. The Bar Association has repeatedly
shown It's desire 10 remedy the evils that generally
have been associated with the present method OF
selecting Judges. Beyond doubt Il can ana ougnl
! TO nave IA great influence in that direction. But II
II does il must be by different methods than those
followed last week which indirectly at least led tt
| the election of Michael Norton 10 an important
| iudicial position.