New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-08-11
LAWYERS IN COUNCIL.
c,,,,r,,r corRr REORGANIZATION.

inc today Thomas j. Scmme, OF NeW-oiieans i0""
n noner on Civil Law" as transpanted INTO
Iouisisna. Ii was o carefully prepared statement
of the laws governing persons ana property al
Louisiana under the Code Napoleon.
rho majority report of the select committee of
fine association on the relief of the United states
supreme Court was then presented. The committee
was appointed at the annual meeting OF the associa-
ton in 1881. and it composed OF Messrs'
Phelps of Vermont, president of the association
Clarkson n. Potter, of New York president elect;
Charles s. Bradley, of Rhode Island; John W.
Stevenson of Kentucky; Cortlandt Parker, OF new
Jersey r. T. Merrick, of Washington City Alex
ander r. Lawton OF Georgia; Rufus King Oh
OHIO; ard Henry Hitchcock, OF Missouri Oh
the death of Carkson n. Potter the vacancy IN the
committee was filed by the unanimous seiec''on Vi
William NJ Evarts The report. after referring 10
the immense amount of business before the 0u-
preme Court and the impossibility OF reaching
decision in case within three years, speaks OF inc
gratifying indications that the National Legislature
NAV respond to the public demand for ac'ion'
The bills introduced in Congress referred TO- Du'
it is remarked that it would not be Wise
nor appropriate for the association to unuertaho
10 review in detail the plans proposed III the blils
or 70 do more than indicate its convictions IN respect
Of the general scheme of relief which should be
relate only TO the comparative merits OF the three
princnal plans before the last Congress- considered
with reference TO their general and characteristic
features. ,
The question, says the report, practically
lies between two general plans One OF
these is represented by oill introduced IN the
House of Representatives by MIR. Manning
of Mississippi and similar bill introduced IN the
Senate by Mr.. Pugh. of Alabama; another, by the
Senate hill introduced by Judge Davis. Of Illinois,
and two House bills one introduced by Mr.. Payson,
of Illinois, and the other (which ii Is understood
was prepared by Judges Blatchford and Benedcp
by Mr.. McCOok, Of New-York for though there are
important differences of detail between the three
bills last mentioned the general scheme OF reieI Is
the same in all. The Honse bill introduced by Mr.
Hardy of New York, and understood tc have been
nrepared by a committee of the New-York Bar As
sncla+,on which provides for increase of Circuit
Judges and the holding of general terms OF the CIR
emit Courts comedies in principle, 20 that extent
with the bills last mentioned
third plan is represented by the bill r'rodnced
III the senateby Mr.. Miller of California, and which
was prepared by Judge Sawyer, of the Ninth C1r-
cuit This bill adopts Senator Davls's PLAN which
Judge Sawyer lin his pamphlet advocating his own
bib considers excellent, far as ii goes y; but,
on the ground that a still larger force Is needed
proyIdes for the addition of nine more Justices to
the Supreme Court. The eighteen Justices OF the
Supreme Cont are then TO constitute " National
Cont of Appeals" inferior TO the supreme
Court. sitting at Washington in two independent
divisions. to which all appeals from the circuits
shall first como. Still above this is to be the en-
lareed Supreme Court Of eighteen Justices, who
shall sit together from time to time the Supreme
Court. only for the hearing Of causes involving
more than one hundred thousand dollars, and APP
meals or causes transferred IN it from the National
Court of Appeals or on from the State courts,
as provided for III the bill.
me DISTINGUISHING features of this plan do not
commend themselves 10 the committee. OF the
two other plans Mr. Mannings bill provides In sub
stance for the division Of the present supreme
Court into three divisions OF three judges each
al equity. " common law, aud '3 all admiralty
and revenue and United States cases Questions
regarding a construction OF the CONSTITUTION, OF
treaty and all causes on error IRON state Su-
irene Court are TO be heard by the full Court.
The characteristic feature of the remaining plan
for the relief of the Federal judciary-as well the
Snnrcne as the inferior courts, which is common 10
the bills introduced respectively by Judge DAVIS III
Tho Senate and Messrs Payson. McCook and Hardy
I'm the House-is that il proposes TO create III some
form i'm the several circuits now established Dy law,
or which may hereafter he established, an inter-
mediate Court OF Appeals. TO which. In the hrSt
instance all apDealabe cases shall be taken Oh
error or appeal from the Circuit or District courts
the ind gmcnt OF such Appellate Court 10 he final III
ALI eases involving less than $1,000, except IN Ger
tain cases This plan affords relief for the Supreme
S"rrt hv Inning the right of appeal thereto IRON
tins Appellate Cont All the bills mentioned, eX-
cent Mr. Hardy's limit such right 10 cases lnYoV-
ing ~ more than $4,000, or. without regard TO
amount nvolvei l2l the construction OF the Con
stitutIon or a treaty or law OF the United States
and l3l questions certified by the Appellate Court
tn he Of sucn nature or Importance To require a
final decision by the Supreme Court; III the TWO
latter cases, Only the speclhc questions oil IA" IN
disDute to be certified up and the decision OF the
APPELLATE Court Oh questions OF tact to be hnal III
all cases. /, IL -.
MANS the one is generally To be preferred which
provides an intermediate appellate court Ia the
several circuits, 49,. =,
Court into SECTIONS whether It's numbers remain as
nj urrsrut or be enlarge would be contrary even
10 The letter OF the Constitution, much more to ITS
true intent-tnai it would impair the dignity and
eIii,eucy of the court and greatly lessen II not de-
stroy the confidence of the people IN the decisions
promulgated III IT'S nafhe,-and that these ialai CD
iectious cannot be avoided unless Oy pIacllcally
srtrrcudcIiug the advantage sodght 10 bc gained
tie committee are unable 10 approve any plan Tor
dividing the Supreme Court 49,
'ibr report is signed by John W. Stevenson,
Charles ). Bradley. kuius KING, Alex. X. Lawton
and Henry iii lchcOck.
Wii,iam Allen Butler, chairman of the Committee
on JurIsprud nee ana Law Reforms presented re-
mort ia pursuance of the resolutions referred them
IN 1879, 1850 and 1851. They proposed the FOL
lowing:
R>sored That this association recommends the pass
agr 10 me Legislatures of the seyerl states and Terri
tories Of the act relating To aeknowdgmens OF instru
mems affecting real estate III The form reported by tile
uittee and under the direction OF said commit
Tee The several local councils be, ana they hereby,
requested furtnef ny all proper means inc passage Of
sucn act Dy their state Legislatures.
Resofred That view OF the frequent occurrence OF
eases OF irregular and fraudulent practices IN the
ouct OF suns involving abuse OF the
OF the courts breach OF pro essicnal obligations and con
iVauce al actual crime the local councils Of the
ton and the state and local bar associations be
respectfully requested ia far AS possible 10 expose such
irr,gartes and frauds and 10 secure tile punishment
/ OF MI parties concerned IN them
Resoicsd That III view of ne growing eVll OF nasty and
ieQz
IN the statute itw the association recommends the
Adoption by the several states OI permanent ys.eh
bv when duty OF revising ana maturing
the acts introduced the Legislatures snail he Entrusted
To officers either by the creation OF special
Or cnnnIltnes OF reYlaOn OF by dcYONms