The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-10-20

JuTISulCtlOn anu tne neeu VI btiehS'h-
ening the court, the provision which
he pleases to characterize by saying
1T may be stuffed by the addition OF
two Judges" Is nj authorization to
the Appellate Division to add to the
Appellate Term in case, In its opin-
ion, such provision becomes necessary.
by designating two Justices of the
court to sit in that part The state
ment that the system thus created
Is far less flexible than the system
we have to-day IL without h slight
est foundation In fact, unless the word
flexible" has lost the meaning
ascribed to 1t In all dictionaries of
the English language. The value of
the entire criticism is summed up in
Mr.. Saxe's statement that in his opin-
ion we are decidedly better Of as we
are. an opinion In which only two
other lawyers out of the entire Con-
~stltutlonal Convention concurred.
In his comments on the Court of
Claims Mr.. la refers to the fact
that the three Judges confirmed in
office by the Constitution are Repub-
Leans. He does not mention the fact
that the Legislature is authorized fur
ther to increase the number Of Judges
Of the Court Of Claims by permanent
or temporary appointment. but not to
exceed Ave in all. The convention
believed that the interests OF the
State would be better serve by con-
tinuing in office the three Judges who
had acquired a familiarity with the
peculiar jurisdiction OF that court.
rafhnr thnN hu Vannitipp al, ahanaag
where too many already had been
made.
Mr.. Saxe's criticism OF the section
which provides for the simplification
of judicial procedure resolves itself
into an attack upon the report of the
Board of Statutory Consolidation and
purposely ignores the fact that the
provision in the revised Constitution
does not require the adoption of that
report, but merely requires the Legis-
lature to act upon IL. to enac a brief
and simple civil practice act and to
adopt a separate body of civil prac-
tice rules. not necessarily the one re-
ported by the board. Mr. SAKE further
knows that h report OF the Board
Of Statutory Consolidation has been
~ " WIN va nv
Legislature for the purpose of inves-
tigation and report TO h mex Legis-
lature and Is the subject at the pres
ent time of consideration by the COM
mittee n by various bar %associa-
lions. whose study and criticism has
been invited by the joint committee.
II his objections to the proposed civil
practice act are well founded he should
give to the committee the benefit of
them. To say. as he does. that the
proposed Constitution expressly puts
its stamp Of approval upon this very
act by name and deed is simply to
misstate the fact. The convention
expressly avoided such approval. and
the Judiciary Committee in its re-
port to the convention stated that the
time at its disposal had been insult
ficient TO enable II to study hat report
sufficiently TO recommend its adoption.
But the general plan OF a short and
simple practice act. supplemented by
rules of court to be thereafter made
and amended by the Judges only. the
Legislature thereafter being prohib-
tied from the constant tinkering which
has so disfigured our judicial proceed
ure. a recommended. and received
the almost unanimous approval of the
convention.
The judiciary article received 1903
Republican and thirty-two Democratic
favorable votes and three adverse
tone Republican and two Democratic).
Mr.. Sake did not vote, but subsequent
~ asked TO have II recorded hat he
would have voted against the article
had he been present.
The action of the association Of the
Bar Of the City of New York in in
dorsing the judiciary article. which
Mr.. SAKE pleases To term n Compli-
ment To Mr.. Root and myself. was
based upon "A careful report made by
a committee of twenty-one well known
lawyers. Had Mr.. SAKE been present
at the meeting when that report was
read and the resolution Of approval
adopted he would hardly have re-
ferred to il as merely a complimentary
vote. GEORGE w. WIcKERsHAM.
NEW YORK, October ~.