The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1900-11-30
pRA1s1Na OUR SUPREME COURT


From the Toronto Globe.
Tie Supreme court OF the United states has
been called the great mechanism Of procrastina-
ton Nine out of ten cases that arc taken
there are said to be so taken only for purposes
OF delay. A speedy hearing may BE- had by
counsel agreeing to forcgo argument, merely
submitting the case on briefs, but four years
usually elapse between the filing OF a case and
the delivery of judgment. The difficulty ap-
pears to be that the court has more work than
it can do if it is TO be done in the thorough
manner prescribed by its rules.
In settling its judgments the Supreme court
Of the United States has adopted mode OF pro-
ccdurc different from the practice OF appellate
courts in England and Canada. IT refuses TO
allow pressure OF business to in any way impair
the dcliberation OF its movements, no doubt
reasoning that if the people desire greater speed
they can get it by limiting the classes of cases
that may he taken to the Supreme court or by
enlarging the court and constituting it in scpa-
rate divisions whenever occasion may require.
At present there are nine Judges. five OF Thnrn
constitute a quorum. The court sits six months
out OF each year, and during that time every
Judge is supposed to be in constant attendance.
the only excuse recognized being illness. Every
Saturday during the term the cases that have
been heard during the week are discussed by the
Judges, and vote taken, beginning with the
Junior Judge and ascending to the chief justice.
The Judgment is settled by a majority vote, and
the chief Justice then assigns all the cases that
have been discussed each to some one member
of the court for rc-eyamination taking care to
distribute them according to the recognized spe-
cialties Of the judges. Each judge to whom
case has thus been assigned writes his opinion.
Printers proofs Of this are then distributed TO
all the justices, who exercise the greatest free
dom Of criticism, not only OF the legal principles
enunciated, but Of the grammatical construction,
and even of the punctuation. The proofs thus
corrected, arc sent back to the author, who
yises his own opinion in the light Of the sug-
gestons received. 1t is then discussed and criti-
cized at the next meeting of the judges for COLI
sultation, and finally settled as representing the
united opinion of the whole court Occasionally
though not often, one OF the judges will dissent.
The aim OF all this painstakng labor Is, OF
course, to settle and establish the law, and one
can easily understand that work so done by
bench OF the ablest lawyers in country OF
great lawyers is work well done.
In our own appellate courts, on the other
hand, the aim would appear to be rather to pre-
serve the individuality OF the Judges than to
arrive at n statement Of the law representing
their united view, Indeed, IL is not an UNI
common thing in our courts 10 get as many
opinions as there are Judges. The result is that
Me law is left unsettled and the impression IL
given to the public that the laws OF the country
are mere matters Of opinion. We venture 10
think that the administration Of law in this
province would be vastly improved by the adop-
tion by our appellate courts OF the system of
preparing judgments in vogue in the United
gtntn