The Billings gazette. [volume] (Billings, Mont.) 1896-1919, 1901-02-26
SUPREME COURT COMMISSION.

: So far as the senate is concerned tn
bill which originated in that brancl
} of the legislature for the organization
> of a commission. adjunctive to the su
preme court is a law, and it is now il
the hands of the house. The object O
the bill is to lessen the work of tn,
court and hasten termination of pend
ing litigation. 1t is agreed that il
purpose the measure is c~ommendable
but it's practicality is open to seriouI
doubt. Under the bill il is purposet
to appoint a commission of three mem
bers whose duty it shall be to examine
all cases brought before the court
classify the testimony, look up author
tiles and act in an advisory capacity
to the justices. In other words, il
will be a sort Of intermediary between
the district courts and that Of last
resort. 1t will not, however, have
the power to pass judgements, fo1
after it shall have done its work the
cases will then still have to be passed
upon by the court itself. It will then
remain for the court to render de-
%cisions based upon the findings of the
commissioners or do as it now does,
make research itself and go into all
the minutea required in causes brought
before it for hearing. Summed up
briefly, the fusion gentlemen of the
upper house of the legislature want to
call in outsiders to help the supreme
court. With equal right and fair
ness they might pass a bill deputizing
some of the men overlooked earlier in
the session when appointments were
given out to perform some of the
duties of the senators.
Objection has been made to the bill
that it places with the governor the
authority to appoint the commission
ers. To overcome this objection it is
now urged hat the house amend it so
as to give the supreme court itself
that authority. This is in the nature
of a remedial suggestion, but it does
not relieve the bill Of another and
more serious objection. On the face
of it the matter seems to be unconsti-
t%utional and it is extremely doubtful
whether it would be sustained by the
very body for whose benefit it is i'll
tended to enact the law. The consti-
tuition provides the manner in which
the Legislature may increase the num-
Der Of justices of the supreme court,
but it does not contain any provision
for the attachment contemplated in
senate bill No. %.
It is conceded that the business of
the court is so vast in volume that as
now constituted it cannot hope to dis
pose of it, but the remedy proposed
will not lessen the labors of the court
to any appreciable extent. If the leg
islature really desires to relieve the
court of it's burden and promote the
interests of litigants it should follow
the constitution and enact a law in
creasing the number of justices to five.
It cannot be argued that a commits
sion such as is proposed would be less
expensive, for no lawyer qualified to
be a member of that body would ac-
cept an appointment as a member for
a salary smaller than is paid to one of
the justices. In fact, it has been
shown that the expense to the state to
maintain the commission would be
greater than if two more justices were
added to the court.
It is claimed now that several sena-
tors who voted for the bill regret hav-
ing done s. SINCE they have given the
subject lore thought and are begin
ming to realize what the bill really
means. If such is the fact 1T holds
out the slight hope that in case the
is amended in the house and
again finds it's way into the senate it
may be killed. The best thing, how
ever, the house can do is to kill it out
and not take any chances on it
in any manner.
A LOGICAL SEQUENCE.