Arizona republican., 1917-12-22
Reforms In Legal Procedure

Judge Smith retiring from the bench of Yavapai county offered recommendation which will no doubt provoke great deal of discussion among mem 0ers of the bar. None of them are new; but though they have been suggested at one time or another without result that prove that they lack ing in merit No other profession than the law stands more obstnately against change By the law in this ,ase, of course, mean, the practice of the law
 Taking the recommendations of Judge Smith up n reverse order of their presentation to requiring higher level qualifications for admission the practice of law Thexe have been sporadic reforms in this respect Formerly it was easy to enter the legal profession it to become day laborer The chief qualification and frequently the only one, was gift of gab," more often than not, meaningless. Then we had system of farcical exam nations. Now. in all nearly all states we have examinations which calculated only to weed out the densely ignorant. These examinations seldom constitute test of qualification
 To get into any other trade profession which the safety health property of the public, one must furnish some proof of skill Yet, annually thousands of embryo lawyers turned loose upon the public, and well meaning and zealqus of them may be, their ignorance and want of skill inn peril the material interests of those who unfortunate to retain them.
 Another recommendation by Judge Smith is that in a criminal bail should not be allowed a victed person appeal except when the appellate court has found reversible error This, of course, would require change in the procedure of ap1 pelate courts Tn the matter of taking up They would be required to give them some attention imme dioely on their presentation This recommsIld' -on looks to placing all the rich and the poor equally before the law. We have, 1t is true and always have had the pleasant fiction which is day dsproved that all equal before the law. The rich man, though. if convicted of a bailable crime may never serve a day in Jail if the last decision should be favorable A poor similarly convicted would, though at last pronounced innocent have undergone punishment while his case was dragging it's slow length through the courts It is this discrimination which confirms dissatisfied in their belief that "there is for the rich and another law for the poor" There seems no good reason why such a recommendation should not be adopted
 Another recommendation to bail in civil cases encounters difficulties Its purpose too is place the poor litigant and the rich the footing to hasten the effectiveness of judgments Under tho recommendation, judgment would not be suspended beyond thirty days except in the of discovery of error by the appellate court
 But it sometimes happens that the United States supreme court has found both the trial the appellate court to be in error. A few years ago notable case, involving many thousands of dollars arose in this county through both the trial and the supreme court with a heavy judgment for the defendants on a counter-clam. The case versed by the United States supreme court and the plaintiff was eventually given judgment. Such rule Judge Smith recommends would have wrought irreparable injury to the plaintiff.
 It is desirable of course to hasten leaden- -heeled justice and to prevent appeals that taken merely to delay the operation of judgment poor litigants But how that may be done without some times nflicting grave injustice has far not been discoverable