The San Francisco call., 1897-01-21
ON SCYLLA TO
AVOID CHARYBD|S
Judge Paterson Criticizes
a Judicial Reform
Measure.
He Thinks Three Appellate
Courts Means a Clash of
Decisions.
Some Sledge. Hammer Comments on a
Court of Discipline-Eviis to
Bs Avo:des.

The proposed constitutional amend
ment for judicial reform, which has the
support of the California Bar Association.
is coming in for deal of criticism at the
hands of many eminent legal practi-
tioners.
The clauses relating to the formation OF
court of discipline and three appellate
courts, especially, are made to sizzle on
the gridiron of criticism.
Not that it is denied at all that there is
urgent need of reformation in judicial af-
fairs. That does not seem to constitute
the bone of contention. It is, in fact,
freely admitted.
The method of reform, however, cuts a
good broad figure. Judge Van R. Pater-
son, whose opinions on points of law al
ways are given careful consideration, is
one of those who disapprove of the meas
ure championed by the Bar Association.
His opinions, given in an interview yes.
terday, are as follows:
1--WE are all aiming at the same object,
namely, the relief OF the Supreme Court
and more speedy determination OF cases
appealed. We do not agree as to whic
one of the several schemes proposed is the
most likely to receive the approval of the
voters at the polls.
my objections to the measure which
meets with the most favor in the Bar
Association are mainly threefold.
First, there is TO be court of dis
cipline, that is to say, body OF persons
clothed with authority to discipline mem
bers of the bar, and all the judges, in
Guiding the Justices of our Supreme
bers of this strange and powerful court we
do not know. OF course, there will be no
such persons, and the power to blast for
ever the regulations OF our Judges and
Justices, it seems, is to be placed in the
hands of a tribunal known only IN mill
tary affairs.
How such a measure and such a tribu-
nal would tend to bring about more in
dependent, fearless and honest admins.
tration of the law I confess am unable 10
see. If the court were to be organized
for the discipline solely of mem bers of the
bar it would not be so jectionable,
although to great many it would seem
dangerous to place the reputation and the
right TO earn livelihood even in the
hands OF rival practitioners.
"But such a tribunal, If desired, can be
provided for by simple act of the Legis-
lature without any constitutional amend
ment. That body has full control over
the qualifications and discipline of the
bar.
Secondly, the system proposed pro-
vides for three appellate courts. This
two evils: clash OF decisions, which
always leads to great dissatisfaction
among members of the bar and litigants,
who lose their cases because unfortunate
enough not to be in some other district,
and additional burdens upon the Su-
preme Court in trying to avoid or correct
such clashing.
Third, l object to the measure pro-
posed for the reason that, in my judg-
ment, regardless ofits merits, no scheme
providing for three new courts and the
imposition of the additional burden
upon the taxpayers of the State will
receive the approval of majority of
the electors. The cry seems to be for re.
trenchment. and unless we can provide
and offer the people an amendment which
we can demonstrate to them will not, if
adopted, materially increase the expenses
of the State government it will be de-
feated at the polls"
Have you any plan in view by which
these Objectionable features could be
avoidedP
"I think have.
"First, l would have no man or set of
men acting as monitors and holding dis
ciplInary rods over Judges of our courts,
either trial or appellate. I would have
them act as the trainers OF our Govern
ment intended they should act-under no
obligation, save their oaths of Office, indi-
vidual honor and integrity.
III we cannot get independent. fearless
and honest administration of the law from
our judicial departments under these con-
ditions, we cannot get it at all, and our
form of government is dead failure, for
the judicial department is the most power
full of the three.
Secondly, would have one appellate
court composed of three or five Judges,
with direction and authority to hold
sessions at such times and places
as the Legislature might provide. This
would bring the court near to the
same three sections Of the State