The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-10-21
THE JUDICIARY ARTICLE.
Senator SAKE Answers Mr.. wicker
sham's Defence Of Its Provisions.

~ THE EDITOR OF IHE SUN-SfT' i
respectfully insist that Mr.. Wicker
sham's letter published In THE Sun to-
day. denuded of its personal references
to me. virtually confesses everything
which I said about the judiciary article.
n that he does not succeed IN avoiding
the effect thereof.
My first objection was that 'the new
article makes wholesale provision Cor
new Judges and commissioners. 1t pro-
vides for three additional Supreme Court
Justices, one additional General Ses-
| sions Judge. seven additional City Court
Judges and n flock of Supreme Court
Commissioners, the number and salaries
OF whom are in no wise limited. The
cost of these new officeholders to the
| city Of New York has been estimated at
probably 10000 900 a year. They are a
wholly unnecessary luxury" Mr.. Wick
ersham points out that some OF these
new officers are not mandatory but per-
missive that, while the number and sal
aries OF new commissioners are not lin
tied In the Constitution. the offices are
within the control Of the Appellate Di-
vision. and he estimates the expense at
a maximum OF $3.50, 900 a year. The
substance Of my charge Is fully adj
mitted.
My second objection, expressed IN con-
siderable detail, was that the proposed
10 N'I Wv 'fa INV
the number of Judges has been unneces-
sarily increased. Mr.. Wickersham at
tempts to Justify this. but u any one has
any doubt Of the fact ] trust he will read
the. Judiciary article itself.
My third objection was that the pro-
posed Constitution. under the preteNt
Of taking the Court OF Claims out OF
politics, makes that court a consti,u-
tional court of record, and provides that
ut shall consist of the three Judges
now In Office thus r~lvetlng three Re
publicans into constitutional office and
prohibiting the people OF the State from
having any voice in the matter, except
TO vote to defeat the Constitution. Mr..
Wickersham's reply is that these Judges.
two of them appointed for the first time
last January, have acquired a fam,li-
arity with the peculiar jurisdiction OF
that court" and hat | have withheld the
fact that the proposed Constitution au-
thorizes the Legislature to increase the
number of Judges This is a defence
that would hang airy one except an ex-
Acknowledgement.
My fourth objection was as to the
method by which The proposed Consti-
tuition attempted to simplify procedure,
and l carefully reviewed the provisions
Of the Constitution on thu subject and
then pointed out the hopeless character
Of the proposed civil practice act. Mr..
Wickersham Is as silent as the tombs
on this new practice act but he asserts
that 1t Ia not bound TO come, even If the
Constitution Is approved. | did not say
II was, but | did say this The dread
full thing about the situation is that the
proposed Constitution and this proposed
act are being expedited In every pos
sible way and the Constitution expressly
puts It's stamp OF approval upon this
very act by name and date, and IF this
act should be expedited and adopted the
proposed Constitution provides that II
cannot be amended for FIVE years The
bar OF the city of New York. instead
Of passing complimentary resolutions,
should awake and take heed" Truly 1t
is the report" and not the act" hat Is
mentioned by name and date In the pro-
posed Constitution but the report re-
ports the act and the Legislature Is re-
CURED to act on the report with all
convenient speed" and 1t is mee Qulb-
bling TO assert that there Is any real
distinction between them.
So far as my convention record on
the judiciary article goes II is perfectly
true that | participated In the debate
on that article only once but Mr.. Wick
ersham. Mr.. Marshall. Mr.. Bracket. Mr..
Sheehan aud other friends Of milne on
the Judiciary Committee We're fully
aware Of my opposition e. the whole
iIA4AI's anu I Wa IfAblA'hl II me l'E-
alive on 1t by unanimous consent n few
moments after the roll was called.
I have read Mr.. Wickersham's series
OF articles In THE SUS. His one great
for the Constitution, rc.tcr-
ated to exhaustion. - hat the various
articles We're adopted by large votes.
This OF course has weight. bat IL IL far
from conclusive For Instance. | intro
duccd on behalf Of the bureau of Mu-
tiplp4l Research IN. Iltr for a SHH,l-
INC budget system. II was revised in
Mr.. Stimson's committee and reported
but IN revising ii the committee inserted
u provision authoriz.ng the LEGISLATURE
to sunmO the Governor before u and
TO cross-exanine him. ! made a fight
to strike out that provision, but ! was
beaten. I was then in the dilemma OF
having to accept 1t or 10 vote against
our own budget scheme as amended. l
decided that that provision alone VAS
not enough to cause me 20 vote against
the whole scheme. although e. would
have to be taken INTO consideration N
weighing the Constitution as a whole.
and I made my position perfectly clear.
as follows:
am so much IN favor % the midget
scheme tina, when ! vote to-day. ! fee,
I must vote in the Affirmative Vet pfl
OF us have TO take into consideration. he
fore We vote on election dly. the good ar
constructive things IN tho Constitution and
the destructive parts II the Constitution
I hope the former viii largely outweigh
the latter, that We may all ne able 20
vote and advise our friends II vote In
favor OF the Constitution We, when We
come to sum up and put the constructive
things on the right hand sido Of the led
ger and the destructive things on the left
side Of the ledger, ! feel that his one posi-
lively unwlse provision must be OH the
wrong eide Of the ledger with thai "a
planation 7 vote. Aye.
Even when | finally voted 40" IN the
Constitution as a whole. | still hoped
that further reflection might bring me
TO support II. | worked diligently Tor
five months. and | believe accomplished
my share. | should he proud 10 see
some of my handwriting in the Cons,itu-
ton of New York State. But the more
| nave read the proposed Constitution
and the more | have reflected the more
settled | ~ become In ny convictions
that there Ii too much bad ~ 4 to
Justify its adoption as a whole in order
to save the good. .JoHN q. SANS
NEW YoRR. October 90.
NAMING THE BABY.