New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-05-18
vicious system subject to great abuses and grave
dangers, should be continued.
SOME OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED.

vicious system subject to great abuses and grave
dangers should be continued
SOME OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED.
A. pamphlet has been lately circulated containing
interview with Judge DAILY, of the Court Of Com
mon Pleas. in which he opposes the consolidation
OF the courts. and In which he puts forth certain
arguments In favor Of continuation OF the present
system. 1t Is therein stated that 1T is part
OF the judicial history Of the State that the ST.
perior Court of New-YOrk CITY was created by the
legislature at the instance OF the Bar which chafed
under the apparent fayoritism shown by the SUI
preme Court to a limited circle OF practitioners
accustomed to appear before Il
III this Is part of the judicial history OF the
State, It seems TO have been reserved for Judge
Daiy to discover It, lie does no; say ne was
present. and 1t Is hardly possible that ne was ana
took part In the proceedings which resulted IN tAe
establishment OF the Superior Court In the first
preface states the reasons which led 20 the estab-
M me OF the suP per m9 ana af by the cong
stitutiOn of 1921. II says This change when
ability was found fully adequate to the requir re
ments OF every part Of tho State. excepting the
city OF New-fork. where nearly as many , causes
OF importance are annually tried ot IS peiieyeol as
In all the State beside The county OF New
York required provision for Itself without neing
reach trial in the Supreme Cour; under the
turn Of the process had become an unusual oc-
currence and this without the imputation OF any
blame to the Judge of the first circuit In the year
1927 these evils had become materially aggravated
The anxiety of the Bar. in addition to the
Gested various remedies for the eyi tina; existed;
and none appeared more obvious than 70 remoaei
Couro by charging its jurisdiction Increasing the
| number Of its judges. and extending the length OF
form, whereby IL was determined TO divide labors
formerly allotted TO single Judge. and In conse-
for the establishment of new and additional Court
Of Common Peas to be sty.ed the superior TGnr,
Of the supreme Court in all civil causes. Accord
ng!y an act OF the Legislature was passed the
II is evident that Mr. Hal who wrote this
preface in 1891, was not acquainted with THIS faes
DAILY has discovered In the year 1894
But when this court established. II must be
remembered. equity and common law were aG-
ministered IN distinct courts, and the Superior
Court was syeH mo onE tn PoTeT 10 II" Pleas had
down to the adoption Of the Constitution OF ~
IN se hoe on an s apTS comr the
same as an appeal from Judgment entered upon
the C5nsttHtlon Of KS was Adopted when law
ana equity were administered by the same court;
that either tie Superior Court or the Court or
Common peas was given equity powers
THE PLEA OF SAFETY.
The only other argument. II argument It can be
called. contained In tn pamphlet mentioned in
favor of maintaining the present system Is that in
some WY. not exactly stated. az one time In the
judicial history Of this State It necessary for
"the Bar to seek the Common Pleas ana Superior
Courts for absolute safety" This statement has
been MAN. times made before. bat never by any
that | know or except the Judges OF lnr fDuIts
named. and have yet to learn OF single case OF
any individual ever being compelled 10 60 TO either
Of those courts for safety The idea that the 3ar
the community would have 70 fee from Judges
Van Bru9t. Barrett Lawrence and Patterson 10
Tor safety H. 10 say the least gro,esque But
moments consideration will show that the real
tain justice against influential defendant bur
IN the schemes contrived whereby an individual
will apDlv to and obtain from court Of justice
the Affirmative relief which he IL not entitled
In he way OF inIunctions ana recelvershipI ana
fber g-la pr
cases in which there has been In the past an abuse
OF judicial proceedings II has been where the plain
tin has selected his court ana his judge. and has
thus obtained unjust orders under which he mas
been enable; to perpetrate fraud or wrong How
much easier ~ this accomplished when there are
three courts. each composed OF a small number OF
a large number Of judges that no one can know
before what particular judge his application VIII
We have seen how easily this sort OF thing may
be omplished under the present system within
tho Last few years, Then prominent poLuGiain
wishing 10 obtain divorce from his VIE nad an
action against himself In the name OF his wife and
upon false affidavit actually obtained trauiu.
lent judgment OF divorce. 1t IL INSTRUCTIVE tnat
G @s but wSs made IN that court to which the
chief Judge thereof points with pride as court
TIA, such a scheme could not have succeeded II
the court proposed had been the only court In the
IMPROVED ADMINISTRATIONS PROMISED.
with such a consolidated court It is hardly posi-
be that the people Of New-York would IN the
morning papers tina, " the judges OF the city
Of New York was known the judicial hustler"
b, .luse he had been able 10 dispose Of and gran,
the creates. number 81 divorces I'm the shortest
time Nor would the administration OF justice In
New-York he open To the charge that year after
year thousands OF people were na;uralZei as clti
zens in such "A way 20 preclude any possible
examination as - the merits OF each application
II ~ a fact that has been demonstrated many times
that neither the conventions that nominate nor the
people tina; elect are particular as 10 the ind
Vluals who are candidates for the judicial posi-
tons In the Superior Court and Court OF Common
Pleas they In regard 70 those In the Supreme
Court Even 10 continue those courts with the pres
cni power wouil give those desiring 10 get con-
troll of Judge or "A court "A much greater oppor-
tunty 10 10 50 thar they would have II there was
supreme Court
II is not necessary for the adoption Of this plan
that the present justices Of the Supreme Court
should b. continued those to be vested with
equity power II the people believe that the judges
OF the Superior Court the Court Of Common
Pleas better fitted - perform that work than
tho present Justices OF the Supreme Court they
be designated the judges 10 whom that power
sha be given The important thing Is that there
should BE- but court for the city OF New-lork
and one set OF Judges to do the equity work.
Qulring constant practice and special knowledge
OF many intricate statutes and rules and one seq
power OF transferring Judges from division
the other as the necessities of the case require
IL clear that there can be but one answer
~ the question 10 whether such system would
not be vastly superior TO the now In operation.
NewYork. May IL. 1894 w ;.