The Waterbury Democrat., 1931-02-27

The senate, by strict party vote, has defeated the bill to establish a system of thirty-six district courts to replace the present town, city, police, borough and traffic courts and largely curtail the functions of justice of the peace courts. This action was not unexpected, even though the bill was drawn by the Judicial council of which George w. Wheeler, formerly chief justice of the supreme court of errors, is chairman. As Senator Leete of En- field said in opposing the measure, "Connecticut is and always has been own-minded," an observation that finds support in frequent perform ances of the general assembly. That attitude of mind probably had quite as much to do with the rejection of the bill as any doubts concerning it's constitutionality which were raised
 by the attorney general.
 It seems to us hardly likely that the judicial council, composed as 1t is of eminent judges and lawyers, would recommend the enactment of an unconstitutional measure even for so laudable purpose as improving the administration of justice. If it be unconstitutional for the governor
 to appoint the judges of the pro- posed district courts, then it would appear that the judges of. the court
 of common pleas, appointed by the governor after the manner of supreme and superior court judges, but without the express authority of the constitution, have been func- tioning all these years unconstitu- tionally.
 In his inaugural message of 1913, Governor Baldwin, opposing the proposal to make all minor court judges elective offices, said, 'The principle of nomination by the gov- ernor and election by the general assembly, first adopted for the supreme court of errors and the superior court, has been for years. and with general acceptance, ex- tended to the court of common pleas, and the district court of Waterbury. | In my opinion, it should be now fur | ther extended to all municipal courts This was accomplished in the court of common pleas and the dis trict court of Waterbury by a brief amendment of our statutes. Sharing
 the views upon this matter expressed
 in their inaugural messages by Gov
 nors Roberts and Woodruff, I rec ommend that the same course be
 adopted in the case of the judges of
 city, police, borough and town courts" | As an expounder and interpreter
 of the constitution, Governor Bald
 win, great chief justice of Con-
 necticut, had no superior. His opin-
 ion and the opinion of the judicial
 council certainly are entitled to as
 much weight as that which the sen-
 ate has seen fit to give to the view
 of the attorney general.
 l The judicial council did not neces-
 sarily expect the judiciary commit
 tee to report out it's draft of dis
 trict court act without change, but
 1t was perhaps hardly prepared to
 have the question of constitutional | ity raised against it. The committee
 was free to recommend such changes
 as 1t saw fit, but it adopted the easier
 course of giving short shrift to the whole proposal, and this was the at- Ititude of the majority in the sen-
 ate. We may expect similar at-
 titude to prevail in the house, where
 town -mindedness is often developed
 to the nth degree.
 Reform, as President Taft once said, is matter of slow and steady lgrowth. and although the legisla-