The Washington herald., 1922-07-03
JUSTICE TRIBUNAL
MEETS FIRST TEST
WITH Big SUCCESS
Demonstrates Efficiency
In Stripping Away
Red Tape.
IN SECOND MONTH
Technicalities Abolished in
Complicated Partnership
Wrangle.
IN SECOND MONTH

NEW YORK. July 2.-The tri-
bunal of Justice, which is being
established in this city by the
newly organized Arbitration So
ciety OF America, has already met
the first test.
On Its official birthday, and be-
fore the work of assembling its
machinery had fairly started, two
parties in controversy made formal
request for an Immediate arbitra-
ton which was promptly granted,
1t was. in effect, a challenge to
demonstrate the efficiency of the
new plan. and the board of gov
ernors unhesitatinEly decided to
meet II, despite general unprepared-
ness. there having been no thought
OF an immediate call for the serv-
Ices OF the tribunal. The tribunal
Is only, now. in the second month
or the society's corporate life. be-
ginning to function.
First Case Complicated.
This first case before the new
tribunal presented a complicated
little partnership wrangle and was
one of those disputes that might
crag through the courts for years,
piling up expense and engendering
bitterness. But in this new court,
oefore a well qualified arbitrator
able to weigh and appraise the evil
dence presented by both sides, the
Misunderstanding seemed to melt
away.
The outstanding feature of the
trial was the way in which the pro-
cedure was stripped of the old en-
osrrassment OF legal technicality
and red tape The manner in which
the fscts were CLEANED and the de-
cision rendered was a revelation.
Tne contestants were Jesse NJ
barrymore and Benjamin H. Lee. OF
the Barrymore-Lee Company, man,
ufacturers of copper boilers and
utensils in New York.
No TechnicalitIes Here.
No summons. complaint. answer
demurrer or other pleadinEs wers
required. The arbitration agree.
ment set forth in FIVE or six lines
the point at issue. and both dispu-
tants proceeded to the fmprovised
courtroom in the Lawyers Club n
present their testimony befor,
Alexander Rose. an associate OF
Judge Moses H Grossman. who was
agreed upon as arbitrator
The controversy was briefly this:
Lee had an establishment for manu-
facturing boilers and utensils. He
proposed opening a retail store for
the sale of this merchandise, and
ne agreed to take Barrymore as a
partner. Tho arrival of Lees
brother from the West changed
these plans. with the result that
Barrymore became his partner
merely in the manufacturing estab-
tshment- Later Lee purchased
some merchandise from the partner
ship, to be sold in his retail store.
barrymore expected a 25 per cent
profit for the partnership. whereas
Lee wanted TO pay only the "marke ct
value" which would yield less than
the Is per cent asked for
VALVES Oath Taking.
Under the method adopted at the
trial the taking Of all the evfdenc.
In the case on both sides occupied
one hour and fifteen minutes. Each
party waived the taking of an oath
~ NAAN ONAACAs anu Nllc HlOQe OF aQ-
ducing testimony was to permit
each of the parties to proceed in a
conversational manner without be-
ing obstructed by technical objec-
tions or nonplussed by subtle cross
examination.
The arbitrator, however. suggest
ed that where a party made a state
ment of fact which justified contra
diction or correction by the other,
Interruption would not be deemed
out of place so long as 1t was done
in a reasonable and orderly way.
This obviated the necessity of wait
ing until the conclusion of all the
evidence on one side before any cor
rection could be made by the other.
In practice 1t resulted. not infre-
quently, in the immediate change or
modification of a statement by the
party SO corrected.
Tell Stories in own Way.
Each party had the satisfaction of
knowing that no part of the evil
dence offered by him was excluded.
Each was allowed to digress, II he
saw ft, to elucidate a fact or cir
cumstance and to advance argument
in his favor based upon it. There
were no technical objections of any
kind demanding the exclusion of
testimony as "hearsay." or as 'fr-
relevant. immaterial and incompe-
tent"
Toward the close of the hearing
the arbitrator frankly told the dis
putants of the impression their tes-
timony had made on him and the
tentative view he entertained as to
the award he would have to make.
His purpose in this was to enable
each Of the parties to correct any
erroneous view he might have
formed as to the facts or any In
justice that might inhere in the
decision outlined.
Need for Forbearance.
He pointed out to them the neces-
sity for forbearance. Indicating the
merit of each adversary's conten-
tion. He told Lee of the benefits
the partnerships had conferred on
him, by giving credit without the
necessity of a rating or guarantee.
To Barrymore he stated that, while
the partnership expected a IS per
cent profit, nevertheless. in the face
of Lees express dissent from that
proposition. he (Barrymore) had
permitted a large quantity of goods
to be taken by Lee without pro-
test Lee had only just established
his retail store, the arbitrator said.
and n c0unpelled 70 nav nrinAS aho..