The Birmingham age-herald., 1915-10-10

houNse thek in his judgement it|would be very vpwise for the house to pass the consolidated court bill at that time. He again called attention to the fact that the purpose of the bill was to con solidate the chancery court and all law and equity courts into the circuitycourt. leaving nothing but the circuit court throughout the state. He also called attention to the fact that the bin which designated the number Of judges for the circuit court and the recircuiting bill which divided the state into oir- cults were both still before the senate Judiciary committee and that if those bills were not favorably reported and also passed a condition would result which would be extremely serious and on the final passage of the bill Mir Brindley contented himself by declin- ing to vote.
 Soon Approved by Governor
 The bill was approved by the govern or soon after 1t passed the house. and it apparently did not dawn on the mem- bers of the legislature until the bill had been actually approved by Gov ernor Henderson of the seriousness of the situation. After the bill had been approved. It was then aparent to the members and to the state at large that all courts had been abolished except the circuit court, which consisted of Is judicial circuits and the Jefferson circuit had only two judges.
 This occurred at the time when many leaders of the legislature were contem- plating second recess and were hop ing to recess on the S5th legislative day. But the approval of the consoli- dated court bill by Governor Hender- son after its passage very promptly and effectually disposed of all talk about another recess as 1t was then l. maining judiciary bills must be enacted into law. The bill providing the num- Der of judges for the circuit courts fi- nally passed both the senate and the house, and the bill which divided the state into judicial circuits was passed during the last days and vetoed by Governor Henderson after the legisla- ture had adjourned.
 reference to the minority report made to the legislature on July Is by Mir. Brindley recalls the fact that he then suggested to the legislature that the adoption of the bills recomm ended by the joint recess committee would throw the whole Judicial system of the state into chaos and the result would be confusion worse confounded. He suggested that if the legislature should decide not to adopt the fragmentary changes suggested by majority of the committee. provision be made for a judicial commission to be composed Of not more than six members and to be selected from the members of the house and senate and from among the justices of the supreme court. a judge of the circuit court and learned lawyer In private life. He suggested that such a judicial commission could frame an adequate. complete and harmonious plan for the revision of the states judi cial system modelled after the plan of the federal judicial code. He also sug- gested that unless the judicial system was revised by such method the re- suits would be unsatisfactory and that successive legislatures would be wrest- ling with the problem of revising the judicial system until an apostle of Justininian or Napoleon should appear.
 Few Changes in Senate
 It Is a matter of legislative record that practically all the bills recommended by the joint recess committee on the judici- ary committee passed the senate with but a few slight changes and came to the house almost In the form recommended by the joint recess committee. It was in the house and before the house judiciary that MT. Brindley did his most effective work and where he was able to defeat large part of the fragmentary bills to which he had objected in his minority report. It is matter of record that the bills which he specifically mentioned and pointedly criticised failed of passage in almost every instance. In addition to the one above referred to in which it was provided that equitable defenses might be set up in a court of law, there was another bill the title of which was ITO further regulate and authorize the mak- ing of equitable defenses and granting relief in actions at law. and to authorize the issuance of injunctions. restraining or ders. and other such relief by courts of law" This bill was specifically criticised in the minority report. but no material change was made by the senate, and 1t reached the house practically in it's orig inal condition, but the house judiciary committee made an adverse report on it and it was never taken from the adverse calendar.
 There were other bills recommended by the recess committee which provided that the defenses of contributory negligence and assumption of risk need not be spe- cially pleaded, but that such defenses might be shown under the general issue by filing statement setting forth gen. erally the facts relied upon by the de- fendant for defense. Another bill pro- vided that the plaintiff in any suit at law might state the same cause of ac- tion in more counts than one. not ex- ceeding three, and that the defendant in any suit at law might state the same matter of defense in more pleas than one, not exceeding three Both of these bills were specifically criticised in the minority report and although both of them passed the senate, they were adversed by the house judiciary committee.
 Solicitors and Outside Practice The majority of the joint recess com mittee also recommended that the sal ary of each circuit solicitor be $2400 per annum and that no circuit solicitor or his