New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-10-16
FROM BENCH AND BAR.
GATHERED FROM LAWYERS AND AMONG
THE COURTS.

MS Chief Judge OF the Court OF Appeals may nave pcen
partly dictated BY political reasons when are hot a'
apparent, but ii Is nevertheless his lr'ou'o "
the highly esteemed judicial orlcer OF tne o'a'
The Republicans had nothing 10 gain pontcaiy ny ,c
| nomination, as the number OF Republican Judges IN
the Court O. Appeas would have been increased IL
some new nominee OF that party had been successful
and the political complexion OF the court would nave
been unaltered If such nominee had been ueleate"'
The Democrats certainly could not render the court
| more Democratic by the nomination OF one OF ther
opponents The selection could not have been uani-
nous II the candidate had not commended hmseit 10
the public by judicial OF unusual fairness and
ability. Judge Andrews had only once been partisan
| candidate for a udgeshlp Of the highest court Ho
was first chosen in $40 when there was provision
for minority representation In 1884 he was noml-
mated with Judge Rapao by both political parues'
lie was a candidate for the Chief Justcesmp IN the
year 1882 disastrous to the Republicans o. TN, STATE
Andrews. OF the original court renalncu Ioeeuo VI
H BENCH ana r a mqh 81 s and
OF Judge Rapalo In 1883, left Judge Andrews ne only
member OF the highest court who originally chosen
! amendment Of 1850. Chief Judge Earls experience
in tho highest appellate court dates back further than
Judge Andrews, as he a member OF the old Court
OF appeals but he not chosen To the bench OF the
candidate for the Chief Jusccshp is distinguished
by his dignity and courtesy as well rs by his learning
and enc He Is n9 to oun cGup e @
aucntly dissents from his colleagues and often states
| his reasons with 50 much force that the minority
opinion seems more convincing than that OF the ma
| jority. His opinion In the reapportlonment cases
last week was as strong as his political opPTh " hs
against whom his Judgment went were NOT. WnSe he
writing It, engaged In nominating him 1or ONCE
Two things. especially, about the decisions In the
reapportionment regretted by many lawyers
who desire to have the highest honor for the tribunal
which rendered them one Is that the court dlvided
! on party lines Many OF the decisions made within
year two in similar cases In the Western States
have been by a unanimous court although the judges
were of differing political parties. Every decision
| of a having political Importance on partisan
basis IS serious injury to the reputation Of the court
| among Independent citizens There has been con
! siderable freedom from parsanshlp In many OF tAe
courts OF other States and In the election cases Of
last fall in this state there was independence SHOWN
| by some Of the judges. The partisan division IN he
reapportlonmcnt Is therefore n step backward
! Another matter Of regret outside Of any political
| consideration among many lawyers was that tho
rule Of compelling exact fairness in appointments
was less closely drawn In this state than II has been
in several other States All Of the Judges admf that
the apportonment Is not exactly even according 10
arlthmetlcal rules. The tendency In Michigan ana
| eomc NJ the other states i 10 acquire arlthmetcal
correctness. that there IS no opportunity. one way
or the other. for political considerations IN 'hi'
matter. The New York rule, as no" "sublsh"n, Is
ihat The apporiIonmcnt Is not a matter Of compute
! tIon but thai the LcglSlaturc may. within certain
\ limit. smaller district n larger r'pTrSehI'io"
than moro popuo one. Ihr gne,,non d a. !"
whether that limit ha, been exceeded WIZ pro"noN
sre GSgrn Isv o nG slv as has brcn done 6y
| the decisions Of judges in ovcrturnng the appor-
@IGS by dd be %" ak par out Of the domain
| q politics.
The question Of plriisanship in judges Is one
| which Is now discussed In law papers In connection
with ore Of the proposed constitutional amendments
which is to be voted on the coming State election
The proposed amendment provides that the election
| return and qualifications OF any member OF either
| house Of the Legislature, when disputed or con
! tested shall De determined by the courts IN snch
manner as the Legislature shall prescribe, ana sucn
determination when made shall be concusiye uio.
/ ito legislature This measure has been advocated
by many persons for several years but II s5li mas
Its opponents. The argument Is maze wa. Wr ~ -
| new plan hc beneficial to ths Lcgslaturs ~
! VIII ic harmful to the courts. THE Alhany Law
Journal Is particularly IN earnest IN opposing ,hr
, change on the ground that the courts are ALREADY
,nS %, np.r',sanshn in the decision Of political
! questions win be almost overwhelming
The other important amendment to the Constitution
offered for adoption or rejection Mt this election
also has some OPP sition. The proposed amendment
IL for the election oi two additional supreme Court
Justice, I'm each o. thu first two judicial districts.
and one additional justice in each OF the remaining
districts The amendment IS awkwardly worded'
According 10 n strict grammatical construction Oh
the language II would mean that 'ne electors vi 'c
first and second judicial districts should elect not
only the two Justices each OF those districts out
tho ,nsticc, for all the other districts Of the state
The section WILL however, undoubtedly be construed
TO mean that the election shall Dc throughout py
districts. The need ~ two additional justices lor
lis district Is sufficiently apparent. IN" work OF me
,~rond district could probably be accomplished
there were additional justice besides Jues@
second Division ~ tho Court Of Appeals. Inc SIN
other Justices Of the supreme Court VINO navo o',,
md
their districts. The judges In the fourth MIN anu
sixth districts. ard perhaps In others. arc no, no"
There are several counties In each OF these districts
TO b, visited. hu the circuit caleIdarS are nSuniy
small An additional Judge may hc needed III we
eighth district II Is probable that 10th amendment
NAV be- carried II sufficient interest Is aroused 10
cause majority Of The electors 10 Vo'''
Tho Columbian holidays brought some legal com
pllcafions 10 the business community ana especially
to the bankers. Thci law making OCTOBER IL
holiday was approved April - last The question
arose rs To- whether the Legislature coud change
contracts made bclor" April ls lso", FOR the pay
ment of commercial paper Oh October IL, so that
tbe noymcnt might be- made on October IL. II the
halliday had been one Of those referred TO In the
general law on that subject the question would not
have arisen rs the contract should have been haoe
with that law In mind. As the day WAS not covered
ly the general law the legal advisers Of the nalns
decided that rs commercial paper dntrd before
April II payment should ho made on october -;
II due but that on paper dated on or after April
o nn p hs following day. some question has also
arisen othe paper due on noxt FRIDAY; Wie~ law
National holiday, and under the general holuay mw
~ his state Is also n Suite holiday, being DAY
appointed "a dny OF thanhsgvns or olGr s ~
gongr and prom~soy notes other than those lat
sight or demand" ayabie not on satn'iay on
% S PAPER due on Friday october II, is thus
by action law payable on Monday october nav Az
A holiday seldom causes so long dchy III 'hc P''
n,nnt of notes and Ill 5 Of exchange.