New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-08-16
THE COURT OF APPEALS.
PLANS FOR IT'S RELIEF DISCUSSED AT
ALBANY.
sEyERAL PROPOSITIONS FOR A CHANGE RE.
JECTED BY THE CONSTITUTIONAL
COMMISSION.
[BY TELEGRAPH TO THE TKrBUNE.l


Albany. Aug. 15.-To-day's session of the Con-
fttutonal Commission was given over entirely
10 the consideration Of the report OF the Com
mitee the Court Of Appeals. Mr.. Raines.
In opening the discussion, said That the OBJ
feet of the Commission TO relieve the Court OF APP
peaIs. As Mr.. Carter had said, the court must be
enlarged the business decreased. In a General
Term the decisions were practically made by two
iudges. a term of five judges, which 1t Is proposed
to create, WI give careful cons Iteration - taue
but it is doubtful whether the work Will be more
rapidly DONE Little relief would be expected from
cutting off orders. 1t proposed TO cut OIL appeal
when the General Term was unanimous. This he
thought Objectionable, was the $1,000 limitation
some of the greatest causes decided in the Court OF
Appeals have been based small amounts, while cases
involving hundreds of thousands of dollars involved
no principle To establish "a court of fourteen mem
,crs sitting as body, was impracticable To es-
ablsh one of seven members would be saying to the
legislature that the creation of the Commission was
mistake; it flying in the face of facts lie sup
posed he was in the minority, but submitted this plan
A court consisting of more judges, which snail
sit as one court two parts OF equal authority as
II shall determine on its own motion, winch slali
also provide for rehearing of causes before the enre
court, the dissent of certain number OF Juuscs III
causes in either part, and also provide against !"
conflict of decision by the division of the calendar Dy
subjects.
Mr. Ward felt that unless some plan Of relief was
presented for the Court Of Appeals, the Commission
would totally fail Of It's mission III was qucs
ton with which all the states Oh ue Cllon
were wrestling and somewhere. in some state
q body of men would be found competent
TO meet It, What were the remedies proposed The great
Commoner of Tammany, whom were it not for losing
him, they would like in the House OF Commons
speaking for Homo Rule had plan for making tle
supreme Court court of last resort in the bulk OF
cases That was better than nothing. lie was gidl
that there no disposition 10 aoridge the rght Oh
appeal.
In favoring the 81 800 limit. Mr. shepard said he
was indifferent as to the negligence cause Some OF
the interests with which he was connected might
have some desire about that Negligence cases were
something new in litigation. Ninc-tenths of these
cases were against corporations, on the ground per
hans that they had no soul 10 be damned. and no
body 10 kick. This is not There were inst As
MANY souls as there stockholders He favored
no reces.es of the court The first General Term he
argued was organized by Moses, backed up by the
Almighty The speaker reeled of some Biblical Quo
ts;ions and followed them up by complimenting the
State Ear Association.
Mr. Griffin quoted figures to show that 1o per cent
If the appeals from the judgment Of the General Term
.re not nnheld by the highest court. BY the hnlta-
tjon clanse but % per cent would be benefited. En-
rerence has shown that appeals from judgments IN
colving small considerations are OF no pracucaDlo
benefit TO the people as they are generalN peaIeh'
Nr Cochran was of the belief that the frivolous cases
sbould be barred out These were carried up by
LAWYERS who simply appealed them for the fees at
tached The law now complicated. 1t should
he 80 smpliGed that ltgant could see the end when
he started Litigation in bad state In New 1ofh
City and a remedy could come none too soon,
Mr. COckran's remarks brought Mr.. Townsend to his
feet with Jump and his hst thumped the desk lie
asserted that he had belonged to the honorable pro
fesion of the for -four years and denied that
most of the appeals TO the Court OF Appeals were
frivolous He also denied that many of the lawyers
had been disloyal. There was recent case "Ii'n
went through many courts aud justice Was 50 Ions
DELAYED that the case became laughing STOCK Inc
learned counsel for the condemned hemmer oained
with the case so long that the people didn't care
whether Kemmer or his counsel were electrocuted'
SO long as the matter settled and the law carried
ont He was talking in Che Interest OF the common
people.
The Chair checked Mr. Townsend, but he rebuhed 1t
for the interference, and had his say TO the emu nc
thought the people who make charges OF dlAioyaiS
coc from the district where perhaps there are some
rasca,.
Al this juncture MIR Cochran moved 10 adjourn until
Tuesday morning. Mr.. Bartlett amended TINS pro
vjdiuc that sessions be held tomorrow The amend
ment was carried by 10 10 10
AZ the afternoon session Mr.. Frost explained the
ronort Of the committee rclteratng his remarks OF
Wednesday and was followed by Mr. Carter, who talked
for an hour and half. lie favored court OF seven
iudr,s with limitation in jurisdiction lie SAID ne
vould not object to a reduction of tie limitation from
l.5O0 TO ~ 900.
o voting to determine how the relief for the Court
Of Appeals was be obtained began with the PROPOSE
lion: Shall the Court Of Appeals consist OF more
than seven judgesin The vote resulted as follows;
Ycas-Nessrs Adams. Bush, Carr Greene, PeaISali'
REYNOLDS. Raines, G. l.. smith, Townsend, Tenant
Wam-1l.
Navs-Messrs Bartlett. Poardman. Barker, Bissell'
Choatc Carter. Cochran. Close. Frost Grfhn Gilbert
Uornblower Kellogg Leary, Marshall Nelson, Shepard
I G Smith Woods Waldo Wright and Danforth-22
The next question submitted this: " Shall there
be any limitation of the right Of appeal to the Court OF
Appeals where the amount in controversy exceeds
s50O?n This was also lost, 10 90. The yeas were
Mcssrs Boardman. Carter, Frost, Grimm, Reynolds
shepard Woods and Danforth. Tire following ques-
tons also met similar fate. there being seven aiirm
alive votes in the first and six in the second; sDai
there be anv Limitation 81 the right Of appeal to the
Court Of Appeals in actions for negligence ?" snail
there be sny limitation of the night Of appeal 10 the
Court Of Appeals from orders, as stated in the supple
mental report Of the Court Of Appeals Committee
The consideration OF James G. SMITHS resolution WIS
then begun. II read a. follows:
Resolved That no appeal shall be taken in civil action
or proceeding from unanimous anrmance by General
Term, except the following cases FirSt-Where inc
Judgment Involves constitutional question Second
Where It involves the construction Of public statute
ThiTd-where question involved has been decided other
wise by General Term. Provided however that an ap
peal may be "a when the General Term rendering
the decision shall certify that there sufficient reasons Tor
appeal. o. judge Of the Court Of Appeals
upon Inspection Of the record shall allow appeal by
his Endorsement upon the notice OF appeal.
The vote on this resulted follows
feas-Messrs. Bartlett, BOariman, Bissell, Carter,
Cochran, Frost Hornblower shepard J. c. Smith,
Ward and Danforth-ll
NayS-Mcssrs. Adams Bush Barker, Choatc. Close
Carr Griffin, Gilbert, Greene Kellogg Leary Marshall
NesOn' fediSail, REYNOLDS. Raincs, g.. J.. smith,
TOWNSEND, Iennast, Wood Waldo and Wrght-22.
Mr; hofhQlower then proposed this proposition {:
snail thcre De second division commission OF the
Court OF Appeals in case of necessity The PROPOSE
ton prevailed by vote OF Is 10 Ia
Tho Meccr