New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-08-21

. mary nations eoch n litigation In ITSELF ana
,ho \ewyork code in particular. "a monster OF
more than 5000 sections each sec'ioh pi's
"nont with some procedure" is fruitful source
of delov (which could be and ought TO he cut
M bv the roots" 1t may be neither safe nor
profitable for laymen 10 engage In me discus
sion Of the merits of the codes. when Is sun
carried on with much vigor ana poSsloi!
with rs little prospect Of agreement as II II hau
been just begun but il Is not unpleasihS ~
hear one side of il represented with such oo'u.
ness and conviction by so eminent lawyer Oh
the period in which codes have fiolIrished
Other causes Of delay. aside from "the abon-
Enable system of references which Is the lr''-
'tical substitute for a trial by jury. ana when
wears out the lifcblood of the parties ana
piles up IN accumulated mass of expense i'r
"ihc fees of lawyers. referees ana s'eh"Si"-
pliers fatal 10 the patience ana "ndhrai'' 81
"cncntS." are the congestion of calendars anu
the granting Of new trials for trivial ana IN
substantial errors. Referring 10 the former. MI
Choatc acknowledges that the CONSTITUTIONAL
Convention OF 1884, over which he presided
made a great mistake in not retaining 'hht
clause of the judiciary article when pro'iueu
for = special commission to clear of arrears Oh
appeals. With reference To the latter he ne
clarcs that new trial should never he granted
even for manifest errors. when II * clear that
no positive harm has resulted and substantial
Justice been done
We have said that on questions OF procedure
it may become the laity Ia speak with ann
dc nee: bu, there is particularly vigorous pas
sage in Mr. Choate's address wherein he takes
II position which asSuredly no intelligent man
should hesitate 10 agree with and support 10
the best of his ability. There Is on" other
abuse" he says. against which we can M I'as'
utter an indignant protest | mean the tol"ra-
"tion of judicial candidates who are Willing or
"pcrmIttcd 10 pay for their nomination. or To pay
"thplr party for their election. No matter WHAT
"thcir personal or professional qualifications IN
"othcr respects may be. such means of reach
ing The Office cannot but degrade the bench. II
has long appeared To uS. but never more plainly
Than in recent years. that this practice of levy
Ing Oh judicial candidates. whether the "Xac'
fon be- regarded as the price paid for nolni-
nation or ~ Il contribution To success n the
polls is indecent and dcmoralizng. II ought To
be abolished if necessary through the agency
OF legislation prescribing rigorous penalties for
It's indulgence.
Amid 81 much that is interesting and excel
lent In Mr. Choat"'s address we note one onlis-
sion which we regret. He insists upon unan-
lmous verdict. and. properly we think. will NOT
concedc that In criminal ease. Juror being in
capacitaicd. The remaining eleven constitute IA
tribunal competent Ia decide the cause. oven
with m" consent of pcopl" and defendant. Rut
such an accident has many times. and recently.
produced the onorous delay wl,"h Mr. 'hoatc
dcllorcs and we wish that. bearing this in
mind. he had referred win approval 10 tie ar
rang ,mcnt lately introduced In France by
which two additional iurymcn are drawn.
sworn and seated IN the box TO meet such an
emergency. while taking no part in the ir'al cN-
cepi as listeners unless called upon in s'cc,"s-
sion 10 I'LL q vacancy We can see no possible
objection 10 such device which Us practical
advantages do not far outweigh II SEEMS 20
provide safeguard which bar associations
and legislatures ought 70 take under careful
consideration. and orr belief is that y j. ono Of
the Few provisions ~ the French law wnch We
might pIohtably adopt.