Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

THEIR APPROVAL ASSURED SUCCESS

But when the critical investigators became enthusiastic teachers, the success of the organized campaign of education immediately instituted was assured, however long deferred by a few unappreciative legislators. State by state, the organized lawyers rose to the occasion for the first time in the history of the world, magnanimously sank all pride of opinion and enthusiastically endorsed the entire program until forty-four states are upon record. But another record has been broken. The presiding judges of the several state appellate courts and the federal circuit courts of appeals organized in 1913 a permanent annual conference, now officially designated as the Judicial Section of the American Bar Association. This was the first formal convention of judges in American history, if not in the world. These were followed by civic organizations like the National Civic Federation, presided over by the lately lamented Seth Low; commercial organizations like the National Association of Credit Men, with J. H. Tregoe as manager; the Southern Commercial Congress; the Chamber of Commerce of the United States and the Commercial Law League of America.

A PRACTICAL AGENT AT WORK

The most intelligent propaganda has been conducted by the American Judicature Society, of which Herbert Harley is the secretary and many national lawyers are directors. It presents model forms as exemplifications of accepted theories and thus reduces conjecture to the concrete. A conspicuous example is a complete system for the correlation of state courts prepared by Chief Justice Sidney Smith of Mississippi, that will eventually command national attention. A schedule of rules is also being prepared by the American Judicature Society with Samuel Rosenbaum, of the Philadelphia Bar, as draftsman.

WHERE IT IS IN OPERATION

It is doubtful if any other national program ever received such enthusiastic endorsement and militant support. The state of Virginia, in 1917, forsook her patchwork common law procedure modified by statute that had become a fetish, when her legislature unanimously enacted the principle of rules of court, yet to be put

into effect. New Hampshire and Connecticut had long since embraced it and New Jersey had gone as far as its Constitution permitted. Colorado followed. The chancery side of the federal courts as well as the admiralty and bankruptcy courts has been most successfully operated by rules of court, and in every new federal tribunal, rules and not statutes, regulate the pleading and procedure.

WHY HAS NOT CONGRESS ACTED?

And yet the necessary federal legislation has not been enacted. It has been the victim of the opportunity for suppression by a committee and the power of preventing a vote on the Senate floor. It is believed that a powerful public sentiment has made these selfish obstruction tactics politically inexpedient or a thing of the past. Although unanimously and promptly recommended by the Judiciary Committee of the House, it was held in the Senate Committee five years and finally favorably reported at the last session too late to survive the personal disfavor of five senators who possessed the power to defeat the organized bar, speaking for the American people. It must now begin de novo. These thoughts inspire the remark that while the administration of justice is too sacred a thing to sink to the level of political partisanship, it is not too far above the heads of those enjoying political preference for a realization, that the same great and much wooed power supports both-the people of the United States-for this has become their battle. They see in it the spirit of pioneer simplicity vitalized by the teaching and sacrifices of America's best lawyers and judges. Thus the next campaign of education may be profitably conducted in a different field.

COMMON LAW PROCEDURE ALMOST ABANDONED

Common law procedure no longer possesses a partisan. It still has a precarious foothold in Florida, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi, Illinois and West Virginia, with the aid of "statutory amendments," the crutches upon which decrepitude has hobbled for more than half a century. Michigan, Mississippi and Illinois are in the throes of an energetic campaign led by men whose names are synonymous with public virtue and patriotism. A committee of the Mississippi State Bar Association, inspired by Chief Justice Sidney Smith, has prepared and submitted a practical program for the

complete reorganization of the state judicature which was published by the American Judicature Society. This will, in due course, be personally presented to and should receive the direct approval of the people when its enactment into law can no longer be prevented.

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF COURT RULES

To the observant a psychological aspect protrudes itself that cannot be underestimated. The sense of responsibility will awaken a new and unselfish interest on the part of the lawyers and will inspire their best efforts. Personal pride will play an important part in inducing them to support and maintain the new régime that would owe its existence and gradual improvement in large measure to the aid contributed by them. This is really the human crux of the whole scheme. Moreover, it will give to the people the benefit of the sympathetic direction of their ablest lawyers and will guide criticism in a harmless manner to a personally responsible and responsive agency. Lawyers will be transformed from the hostile juridical critics that they are now forced to be, into the helpful supporters they should be, as officers of the court.

LET US HAVE A HIGH JUDICIAL COMMISSION

We have spoken of the gradual improvement of the proposed system of rules which is as important as formulating them. This implies a central agency to receive, analyze and formulate suggestions from the bench and bar. This is the English custom, and some organization is essential. Dean Wigmore suggested a "Superintendent of the Courts." Accepting the principle, but expanding the idea for the purpose of economy and greater usefulness, we suggested an uncompensated High Judicial Commission to meet bimonthly, and composed of the attorney-general or solicitor-general, a member of the Supreme Court of the United States; a United States circuit and district judge; two state appellate court judges; two law teachers and four practicing lawyers. They would have an office and a paid secretary located at Washington who would receive and distribute to the members all communications from the people, the bench and the bar. These would greatly aid and stimulate the members of the Commission in their personal observations and deliberations.

SOME CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

If, without presenting the scientific merits of a system of rules of court and its advantages over common law procedure, the common law procedure modified by statute, and the code practice, a sense of gratification is felt that will be a satisfying evidence of the success of the campaign for the modernization of the courts. It will be an inspiring reward for the time and money patriotically invested by interested lawyers, who have unselfishly labored against legislative indifference or obstinacy. Success is assured the moment the American Bar Association's federal procedure bill can be brought to a vote in the United States Senate. That is the answer to the inquiry of progress! Edmund Burke has well expressed the sentiment of the modern judges and lawyers, "Applaud us when we run, console us when we fall, cheer us when we recover, but let us pass on-for God's sake-let us pass on!"

AN EFFICIENT COUNTY COURT SYSTEM

BY HERBERT HARLEY,

Secretary, American Judicature Society, Chicago, Ill.

Our judicial system hardly makes a pretense of affording good service to the greatest number of litigants. The courts frequented by persons whose claims involve small amounts are seldom considered in respect to reform of judicial procedure. Lawyers are little concerned with the conduct of inferior courts. No considerable part of their income is derived from this source. Practice in them is limited to young lawyers eager for experience but willing to give up this "chicken-feed" business as soon as their situation permits.

This is a principal reason why these popular tribunals escape serious criticism. It is easier to make a joke of them. The few serious opinions voiced are profoundly skeptical. Here and there are found capable magistrates and judges and the belief prevails that inferior courts can never be better except as they chance from time to time to obtain the services of judges who combine knowledge of the law with energy, courage and tact. Such instances are purely fortuitous. A common idea of representative institutions is that they can be expected to do no more than represent the meanest ideals of the community.

Here seems to be the real trouble: that we have not thought of shaping a system that would attract to this arduous service exceptional qualities, the best that the community possesses. We most lack an ideal of what a local court of limited jurisdiction may become, notwithstanding the fact that certain other countries have solved the problem. It is true that we have a healthy movement looking to the reformation or effacement of the petty tribunal in the large city, where it has been corrupt as well as incapable, but in rural districts the problems of inferior jurisdiction will persist.

More than half of the people of the United States live in counties that are classified as rural or semi-rural. In number of causes and in number of litigants these lesser courts will always exceed the more formal and dignified courts of full trial jurisdiction. Failure in this field of judicial administration is a disgrace as well

« AnteriorContinuar »