New-York tribune., 1890-08-08
TIE .JUDICJ1RY COMMISSION.

The illness of Commissioners Rollins, COudcrt
and Russell is not alone their personal mis-
fortune it is also the misfortune of the people
of the State in keeping them FROM attendance
as members of the Commission now engaged
at Albany in revising the judiciary article of
tho Constitution. Under some circumstances
this absence might not seem OF such great mo-
ment; but in the present situation it is of the
last importance that they should participate in
the deliberations and conclusions of their asso-
cates.
The Commission upon assembling, with
thirty-fve out of thirty yeight of its members
present. proceeded at once to discuss and pass
upon the extremely radical proposition OF It's
Supreme Court Committee to establish new
State court of appeal in the place of the pres
ent General Term in each department. Under
this new system twenty judges are to be elect
ed by the people of the whole State, who are
to be parcelled out every five years by the Gov
ernOr into four courts OF five judges each, one
court sitting in each department, to hear the
intermediate appeals that now are heard by
the Supreme Court Judges sitting at General
Term. This new court is still to he called
the General Term of the Supreme Court al
though as its judges can sit in no other Ca
pacify. it is admitted by the advocates OF the
scheme that an entirely new name would be
more appropriate, and that the old one Is re-
tanned chiefly to disarm prejudice at the fnno-
vation and to preserve as far as possible the
historical continuity of the court.
That this proposed change in our JUDICIAL
system is radical and far-reaching i'll its con-
sequences is apparent from the statement OF Its
terms. 1t is of the highest Importance that the
results of the work of the Commission should
be satisfactory to the people of the State when
they come to pass upon them otherwise, NOT
only will the labors of the Commission have
been thrown away, but years of time will be
lost in the work of recognizing and reform
ing the courts Such Endorsement by the peO-
pie can scarcely be expected unless the pro-
posed changes in the Constitution come to them
supported by the substantial unanimity of the
members of the Commission itself. Such is
unfortunately not the fact with regard to this
first important PROPOSAL The vote in tho
Commission upon its most essential features
stood II to II until the chairman cast the de-
Gliding vote in favor of the scheme How the
vote might have been modified or reversed II
the three absentecs had been present il is I'M
possible to say. But as the matter stands at
present the Commission is as evenly divided
as it is possible to be upon the question.
The Commissioners can scarcely disregard
two suggestions that are emphasized by these
facts One is. that no action of the Com
mission upon this or any matter OF similar
Importance upon which opinions are closely
divided should be considered final until it has
been passed upon by all the members. The
other is rs to the exercise OF the greatest eau
ton in recommending to the Legislature any
radical reformation of the Constitution upon
narrow majority vote in the Commission it.
self That the Commissioners themselves recog-
nize the force of these propositions is apparent
from the action of Mr.. Fiero, who was the
originator of this scheme, In moving its recon-
sideration that it might be tabled and passed
upon again in full convention In fact, tho
care calmness of deliberation, freedom from
personal feeling and judicial temper that have
marked the action of the Commission this week
at Albany are such as to inspire great confidence
on the part of the people. Any system OF
judiciary revision which is adopted by the en-
tire body is likely TO receive legislative and
popular Endorsement. But, on the other hand,
none but evil results are likely to flow from
its presentation of any scheme which has the
support of bare majority of its members.