The Penn's Grove record., 1903-09-18


MENTs.
Reasons are Clearly Presented why
the Voters of New jersey Should
Vote Against Their Adoption.
From Trenton True American.
Besides the evil in the manner OF
their connection and Of their presenta-
ton, the proposed amendments contain
several features wholly unworthy q
adoption.
The main feature Of an independents
court of last resort has been much de-
sired for more reasons than one, and y
could readily have been obtained with
out such an upheaval as is provided IN
the amendments.
The first change that these amend
ments make is in the construction OF
what is popularity known as the Court
of Pardons.. At present this court con-
sists of the Governor, the Chancellor,
and the Judges, of the Court Of Errors.
Up to the adoption of this provision, In
1843, the Governor and Chancellor were
one and the same person. And there
was, therefore, an appropriateness IN
committing the power and duties OF the
Court of Pardons to the Chancellor.
The proposed amendment makes the
court to consist of the Governor, the
Attorney General and the Chancellor
two political and one judicial officers
and the judicial officer SO burdened with
duties as to be unable to give any but a
prefunctory attention to the Court OF
Pardons. The Attorney General is, in
| theory, the prosecuting officer OF the
I State, but, in fact, is as far removed
from the consideration of criminal cas-
es as it is possible for him to be. Such
a court must necessarily resolve itself
into a tribunal for registering the ideas
| and purposes of the State prison officials.
We all know from experience what that
| means, and will be as little inclined to
| incur a repetition, particularly since the
parole law has given the Court Of Par
| dons the power to suspend the sentences
of the trial courts.
The great feature of the amendmehs
is to create an independent court Of last
tresort, to be known as the Court of En-
rors and Appeals, to consist of q chief
justice and four associate justices.
These five judges are to be paid large
salaries, and may be in constant session
(having no other duty, and shall hear
and consider all appeals or writs OF err
Tor brought either from the law or
equity courts. 1t is apparent that this
court is unnecessarily large for the pur-
| pose. Three judges are as good as five,
if they are all sound judges, and better
than five, if any part of the five is only
| to furnish votes for the sustaining Of
the divided opinion. We believe that
the history of the New Jersey courts
will show that the wiseSt and most con-
scientious and most uniform Of the de-
cisions were those delivered by the
Chancellor of the State, when he was
alone upon the bench. Still, as a court
of last resort, from whose decision there
is no appeal, it is well that there should
be more than Judge, but that does
not justify the use Of five judges, when
judges are so expensive a luxury.
AS now proposed, the new court will
cost forty or fifty thousand dollars a year
additional to the present cost of the
court. A useless expense.
The proposed amendments lako away
from the Supreme Court judges the du-
ty of acting as judges Of the Court Of
Errors; the duty of hearing appeals
from the Circuit and lesser courts; and
by recognizing the Circuit Court judges
paves the way for relieving them Of the
circuit business.
The court is left however, with its
present membership and pay, and this
creates a wholly and unnecessary ex-
pense.
The present Court of Chancery con-
sists of the Chancellor, and while the
statute has authorized the appointment
by him of assistants, known as Vice
~Chancellors, the jurisdiction Of the
court remains with him alone, and all
process runs in his name.
The proposed amendments makes the
Court of Chancery to consist of the
Chancellor and as many Vice Chancel-
lors as the Legislature may authorize,
vests the jurisdiction of the court in
each of them, and provides that the
Governor shall appoint the Vice Chan
cellors. A more violent or more dan
gerous departure from the wise provis-
ion of our Constitution could not well
be imagined. 1t breaks the unity Of
the court; makes the appointment of
dependent upon partisan and
political influence, and provides for
such a variance in chancery decisions
and action as will involve confusion
and loss. In these days when govern
ment by injunction has become so pre-
valent, it is of the highest Importance
that the power of injunction should not
be vested in too many hands, and too
varying impulses. It would be very
ex~asperating, if not ~demoralizing, to
have one Vice Chancellor issuing an in.
junction against a railroad or labor I'M
ion, from one view of the equities Of
the occasion, and another Vice Chan
cellor dissolving it from another point
OF view. And it would be equally de-
moralizing to find the Chancellor Of
New Jersey made one of a bunch Of CO.