The sun., 1897-03-14

Among the peculiar features nppcrtainins to
the practice OF law when Mr.. Clinton was adj
mitted to the bar the most remarkable was the
system Of foes for Judges which prevailed 1t
seems that whenever Judge signed his name to
an order he was entitled to foe OF 81. In Cham
bcrs whom lawyer or a clerk from law Office
presented an order for the Judge to sign. he
handed up n dollar with his papers II the Judge
did not sign tho order he lost the dollar. Human
nature bcing what IL is. We can see that he would
almost always sign II. But cupidity worked both
ways. When the eL pdrte order was signed and
served. the other side was pretty sure to apply
for order to show cause why II should not
be vacated. and. on tho payment Of n second dol
lar. the order to show cause was usually grant
Cd Although hundreds OF orders might DO
granted in single day by the Judge at Cham
bcrs, he would got 81 for each In New York
city tho Judges Of the Superior Court and tho
Judges Of the Common Pleas pooled their fees.
There being at that time throo Judges In each
court, II mattercd not what Judge sat Mt Cham
tcrs; ho could retain but onethird OF the ag.
grcgato fees received. These aggregate fees
amounted to nvo OF six times the aggregate sal.
aries Of tho Judges. In the Supreme Court there
was but one Judge who could take foes: he was
known as the Circuit Judge. The aggregate
amount Of his foes said to DO enormous.
The share Of fees received by each Judge OF tho
Superior Court and OF the Common Pleas. was
supposed to DO between 81 900 and 81 {. 900 per
annun. Mr.. Clinton reminds us that In
the days prior to 1s4S a dollar would go
as far as four or 6vo dollars at tho present time.
SO that each Of the Judges received a compcnsa-
ton equivalent to not less than fifty or sixty
thousand dollars or moro por annum, at the pres
ent time. Tho consequence that the best
legal talent in the city was willing and oven
eager to accept o scat on tho bench. The author
deems 1t doubtful whether any lawyer in New
York Noted from his practice annually any ywhcro
ncar as much as the yearly compensation re-
ccived by each OF the Judges Lawyers fees, In
truth, at that time. compared with the fees OF
the present day. were very small Fifty dollars
for trying an important case in the Circuit or in
tho Superior Court Common Pleas, II II did
not take moro than two or three days, con-
sidcred a fair honorarium. Now q fee OF thou
sand dollars would bc moro than ordinary
recompenso for services then rendered for a hun
dred dollars. On the other hand. the expenses
OF lawyers at that time, including rent and clerk
hire. were very small not more than a fourth OF
fifth as much as at the present day. For exam
pie whereas the ront for first-class law Office
was then six or eight hundred dollars per an
mum, II would now DO from three to six thousand
dollars and upward. Rents OF dwelling houses
were proportionately small. As good n house
in fashionable location could then be had for
six or eight hundred dollars per annum as can
now DO obtained for from thrce to fvo tho usand
dollars. Before leaving this topic Mr.. Clinton
reminds us that tho right Of Judges 10 receive
fees was abolished by tho State Constitution
which went into effect in l8i8.