This would, in effect, confine the continuance of an ex parte injunction to two days. For two years past I have urged this provision upon the Judiciary Committee of the Legislature, but without success. Once it passed one House, and was defeated in the other. The third remedy is never to allow injunctions ex parte, but require notice longer or shorter to be given in every case. This, upon the whole, I think the best remedy of all. A similar provision has always obtained in the Federal courts. The judges should favor it because it would relieve them from a great deal of disagreeable responsibility. They are now liable to be importuned by suitors upon exaggerated statements; they would then have an opportunity to hear both sides before acting. No doubt there are some cases where a right may be placed in jeopardy while the notice is running, but this evil in these few instances is small compared with the great evil of so many indefensible ex parte injunctions. And to lessen even the former, I would also provide that when an injunction is granted upon notice, the court shall have power also to order any thing done after the notice and before the motion to be undone and matters placed in statu quo. This would answer most of the purposes of a restraining order, while it avoided the evil of judicial order affecting one's rights before hearing him. RECEIVERS AND REFEREES. "As to the appointment of receivers, I do not believe that there ever was any authority to do it ex parte. I am sure such authority is liable to infinite abuse, and I would make sure against it by prohibiting it altogether. Judicial patronage in the appointment of referees is a source of much trouble. It was so in 1848, and one section of the Code was especially directed against it. That provided that when the parties agreed upon a referee, he should be appointed, and if they did not agree, one should be named by each party and the two should choose a third, or, failing to choose, a third should be drawn from the jury box. The note of the Commisioners to this section stated that "The power given to the court of appointing referees has already, in the city of New York, given rise to great embarrassment. Judicial patronage by this means has become greater than has ever before been known among us, and should not be allowed to continue. We have devised the best means we could of putting an end to it absolutely. If the effect should be to induce parties to agree generally upon the referee, as we hope will be the case, we shall esteem it an opportune provision.' "The section, however, stood but a short time, and gave way to the present mode of appointment. I would now recur to that, and would not only allow the parties to choose their own referee, but would provide for a mode of selection independent of the court, whenever the parties could not agree. Thus I venture to suggest, as the only legislation required to remedy the evils I have mentioned, the following provisions, viz.: "1. Requiring the judges to sit one-fourth of the time at court out of their district. "2. Requiring notice before issuing an injunction or appointing a receiver. "3. Selecting referees solely by the intervention of the parties themselves. And I would also urge upon the Judges to meet in August, and provide for a more general Interchange throughout the State, and prevent conflicts of jurisdiction. The book of forms, prepared under the authority of the Legislature, and adapted to the Code, has never been adopted. It would be a convenience to lawyers and a saving to courts, and I beg leave to call your attention to the propriety of sanctioning it by a legislative act; not by way of imposing them upon those who do not wish to use them, but by declaring that, when used, they should be deemed sufficient. "A bill has been drawn in accordance with these suggestions, which I will take the liberty of handing to you. Beside the provisions that have been mentioned it contains two or three others which appear desirable. One of them more clearly defines the duties of the sheriff in executing an order of arrest, so that he shall be obliged to take bail at any hour of the day or night. It has been the practice in New York to receive bail only at the sheriff's office, and as that is closed at night, a person afterward arrested is obliged to remain in custody till the next morning. This should be prevented; and if a defendant is arrested after nightfall he should be entitled to bail even at that time. Then, as to allowances in addition to costs, I submit that they should be reduced more nearly to the limit in which the Code first placed them, that is to actions for money demand or for specific lands or chattels. I would not have them extended generally to actions for specific relief- a section having that object is among the rest. Those are all the suggestions which I wish now to make in respect to the administration of justice in civil cases. CODE OF CRIMINAL PRACTICE. "In respect to criminal practice, I would earnestly urge upon the Legislature the adoption of the Code of Criminal Procedure, prepared by the Commissioners of Practice and Pleadings, and submitted to the Legislature in 1850. This Code has been sanctioned by a committee of the Assembly of 1855, who requested the opinions of Judges and district attorneys, and received favorable answers. It has received a still higher sanction, that of the Legislatures of ten at least of the States and Territories of this Union, and of their people who have had it in use for several years. It is of course not possible for me here to enumerate all the benefits which I anticipate from its adoption, but I will mention some of them. It will place within the reach of every citizen a little book containing the whole law relating to criminal proceedings. It will furnish inferior magistrates with a guide for their conduct in office. It will do away with the cumbrous jargon of our present indictments, and substitute a simpler and plainer statement of the crime charged. It will render the prosecution of crime more effectual, by the most stringent provisions in respect to bail, and by requiring the preliminary examination after arrest to be gone through at a single sitting, unless the magistrate, for good cause shown by affidavit, adjourns it, the adjournment to be for not more than two days at one time, and not more than six days in all, unless by consent of the defendant. And it will throw additional safeguards about innocence, three or four of which only can I here mention. One of them is the giving to a defendant, in all cases, an opportunity to be heard before an indictment is found against him. The grand jury is now not infrequently made the instrument of private malice. It is here provided that, if the defendant has not previously had an examination before a committing magistrate, the grand jury shall be permitted to originate only a presentment, upon which a warrant for arrest and examination shall be had previous to an indictment. It is mentioned in one of the notes that an indictment had been found upon a one-sided and extra Judicial affidavit taken in another State,' and that in another a witness was conducted into the grand jury room with a long written narrative prepared by another, and was sworn by the grand jury generally as to the truth of the statement. "It is also provided that, when the grand jury have once dismissed a case, it cannot be renewed before another grand jury without the order of the court. Another is to require the magistrate before whom a person arrested is brought for examination to wait a reasonable time for counsel, and to send a messenger for any one in the same city or town whom the defendant may designate. Another is to allow a defendant his liberty in a bailable case, while under examination, upon the deposit of a sum of money fixed by the magistrate. The other provision is giving the defendant at the trial the last word to the jury. These examples will be sufficient, I trust, to induce you to examine this Code, and upon examination I trust you will see enough to induce you to give it your sanction. CIVIL AND PENAL CODES. "While I am upon the subject of codification, you will pardon me if I go a step further and urge upon you the adoption of the Civil and Penal Codes proposed and reported by the Commissioners of the Code in 1865. You know that the Codes of Civil and Criminal Procedure make but a part of our legal system, and that three other Codes-the Political, Civil, and Penal-were designed to form with them a complete body of law. These were all required by the Constitution under which we are living. How much labor has been spent upon them, I need not tell you. Everything was done which the Commissioners could do to render them perfect. First, a draft was prepared and distributed among the judges and others for criticism and suggestion. After that, a thorough revision was had; the whole work was gone over again, and everything which had been suggested, or which the Commissioners could think of, was considered. The Penal Code defines all the crimes for which a person can be punished, and prescribes the punishment, making, it is supposed, a more just gradation of crime and punishment than now exists. The Civil Code embraces the whole subject of civil rights and relations. No pains were spared in its preparation. Every section was written and re-written-some more than a dozen times. FINAL SUGGESTIONS. "What I venture to ask of this Legislature is to pass the few amendments to civil procedure which are contained in the bill I have presented, to sanction the book of forms and to pass the Code of Criminal Procedure; and if it will not, as I wish it would, pass at once the Civil and Penal Codes, refer them to a joint select committee, with directions to report to the next Legislature. "One word more. Bills are pending to carry into effect the new judiciary article of the Constitution, and all of them contemplate the union of the First District with another in the formation of a General Term. The business of the First district is sufficient to occupy any one General Term the whole time, and if the business of another district is thrown upon it, I do not believe appeals can be heard as fast as they arise. Will the Legislature compare the judicial business of different parts of the State before deciding upon so important a measure?" Judge Poland, and other lawyers in the House of Representatives, are preparing a bill giving the U. S. Commissioners and Registers in bankruptcy power to receive initiatory proceedings in admiralty cases. This is intended to facilitate admiralty proceedings, as the Supreme Court has decided that only U. S. courts can decide such cases. BILL OF COSTS OF AN ENGLISH SOLICITOR. A party in St. Louis, having fallen heir to a legacy of fifty pounds by the death of a relative in England, employed a solicitor of London to collect and transmit it. The business was done with promptness, and the solicitor sent the following bill of charges for his services: Mrs. Baker to John Henry Pinkerton, Solicitor, ner.... Letter to my correspondent in Hungerford, to ascertain particulars of property of the late Mrs. Gardiner, and entry. Dr. 6s 8d 3s 6d July 3 Letter to Mrs. Parks, for payment of legacy and entry. 3s 6d Letter to Mrs. Baker's solicitors in St. Louis, U. S. 4s 6d 6s 8d 18 68 84 ..£1 8s 4d 12s March 18- Attending on solicitor for Mrs. Parks, when he required me to produce authentication of probate of Mrs. Baker..... April 14- Perusing letter from Mrs. Baker's solicitors, with probate April 16-Letter to Mrs. Parks' solicitor that I had received authentication of probate, and requesting him to have the matter arranged, and entry. April 24-Letter to Mrs. Parks in reply to hers, and entry. April 28- Attending this day on Mrs. Parks and her solicitor to arrange what amount of interest I could claim on legacy, when, after consultation as to when the legacy was payable, and when funds were realized, I agreed to accept £60 in full... May 23-Letter to Mr. Boggs, Mrs. Parks' solicitor, that I should have matters settled forthwith or that I would take proceedings, and entry.... June 1-Attending Mr. Boggs when he requested me to send him copies of administration and authentication, and he would let me know whether he would advise his client to pay. June 2-Copy of administration sent to Mr. Boggs, eighteen folios 68 8d 28 6d 3s 6d 3s 6d 13s 4d 3s 6d Letter therewith, and entry.. 6s 8d 4s 6d 3s 6d June 4-Perusing letter from Mr. Boggs that he could not advise his client to pay without some power of attorney from Mrs. Baker.. 28 6d June 5-Letter to Messrs. Smith and Jones, Mrs. Baker's solicitor, in St. Louis, U. S. A., and entry and postage... 4s 6d 2s 6d Oct. 3-Perusing letter from Messrs Smith and Jones, inclosing power of attorney. Oct. 5- Letter to Mrs. Parks' solicitor that I had received power of attorney, and requiring him to pay me amount agreed on.. Oct. 8-Perusing letter from Mr. Boggs in reply, requiring me to furnish copy of power of attor 3s 6d 28 6d 6s 6d 3s 6d 6s 8d 68 8d Dec. 3- Attendance at bank to get letter of credit for £51 9s 6d... 6s 8d Dec. 4-Letter to Messrs. Smith and Jones, solicitors, St. Louis, U. S. A., therewith, and entry and postage...... 4s 6d £8 10s 6d Judge Carpenter, of Charleston, decided that a note drawn payable "six months after the declaration of peace between the United States of America and the Confederate States of America" could not be collected, as no peace has been declared between those Governments. Exceptions were taken on the ground that the close of hostilities was a virtual declaration of peace. THE HIGH COURT AT TOURS. The French Constitution of January 14, 1852, established a High Court of Justice, which adjudicates in cases of attempts against the life of the Emperor, or a conspiracy against him or the security of the State. Its jurisdiction also includes the trial of members of the imperial family charged with grave offenses. This Court is only convoked by imperial decree. It consists of a Chamber of Accusation and a Judgment Chamber, formed of Judges taken from the Court of Cassation, with a High Jury composed of members from the Councils Generals of the Departments. Each Chamber is composed of five Judges and five Assistant Judges They are named annually by the Emperor. The President, Procureur-General, and other magistrates required for the organization of the Court, are named by the imperial decree which summons it. This body consists of thirty-six jurymen and four assistant Judges. When the decree of convocation is issued the first President of the Court of Appeal in such department is required within ten days to draw by lot, in open court, the name of one person from the list of the members of the Council General, to serve as jurymen under a heavy penalty. The thirty-six who are to form the jury are taken from the jurymen when the court convenes. Various officials are ineligible to act on the High Jury. The Council General from which the High Jury is thus selected is, it may be added, a body in each department, which legislates upon the concerns of the department in regard to internal improvements and the collection of taxes. It consists of as many members in each department as there are cantons, but the number is in no case to exceed thirty. An electoral assembly in each canton, consisting of electors and citizens found on the jury list, elects a member to the Council General. Members thereof must be aged over twenty-five years, and pay two hundred francs annually in direct taxes. Some officials representing the Imperial Government are not eligible as members CouncilorsGeneral are elected for nine years, but it is so arranged that one-third retire every three years. It is apparent from these details that the High Jury is constituted in a very distinguished manner. When an Imperial decree notifies the High Court to exercise its functions the Chamber of Accusation, which is to a great extent equivalent to the Grand Jury in this country, enters upon its duties. If the charge is not sufficiently grave for the High Court it remits it to an ordinary tribunal. When it pronounces that the matter shall be heard before the Judgment Chamber the Emperor convokes the Chamber of Judgment, and names the place where the trial is to take place. In the case of Prince Bonaparte, the Chamber of Accusation directed, by an order dated on the 18th day of February, that he is to be tried firstly for having committed homicide on the person of Victor Noir, which was preceded or followed by an attempt on the person of Ulrich Fonvielle; secondly, for having attempted the homicide of Fonvielle. This order places the Prince under article 304 of the penal code, the punishment being death. In case of extenuating circumstances the Court can lessen the sentence by two degrees. Upon the announcement of this decision the Emperor convoked the High Court, which is now in session. In this decree, Counselor Glandaz is named Presiding Judge. He has had an experience of thirty-nine years at the legal profession, and belongs to a family eminent for the distinguished men it has contributed to the bar. The duties of Procureur-General are intrusted to M. Grandperret, Procureur-General of the Imperial Court of Paris, assisted by M. Bergognie, his deputy. An important regulation of the High Court is that the declaration of the High Jury finding the accused guilty, or finding that extenuating circumstances exist, must be rendered by a majority of more than twenty votes. It will, therefore, be necessary that at least thirty-one members of the Jury agree to a verdict of guilty to render it of effect. It is evident that the chances of disagreement are very great.-N. Y. Tribune. TERMS OF THE SUPREME COURT FOR APRIL. 1st Monday, General Term, New York, Ingraham, Cardozo and Barnard. 1st Monday, Special Term (Chambers), New York, Brady. 1st Monday, Circuit and Oyer and Terminer, Queens, Tappen. 1st Monday, Circuit and Oyer and Terminer, Kings, Barnard. 1st Monday, Circuit and Oyer and Terminer, Richmond, Gilbert. 1st Monday, Special Term (Motions), Kings, Pratt. 1st Monday, Circuit and Oyer and Terminer, Monroe, Dwight. 1st Monday, Circuit and Oyer and Terminer, Bath, J. C. Smith. 1st Monday, Circuit and Oyer and Terminer, Cayuga, Johnson. 1st Tuesday, General Term, Schenectady. 1st Tuesday, General Term, Syracuse. A resident of St. Louis has been fined five dollars for calling a judge a liar. LEGAL NEWS. The bill incorporating the New York Bar Association has passed in the Senate of this State. Every lawyer in Collinsville, Conn., has been blessed with an heir during the past two months. Hon. Frederick Krapp, one of the leading members of the New York bar, is going back to Germany to live. A San Francisco judge find a man ten dollars for assault and battery, and lent him the money to pay it. Wm. M. Evarts has been retained by the English Erie stockholders as leading counsel in the suit against Fisk and Gould. A judge at Muncie, Iowa, recently fined a female resident of that place twenty dollars for thrashing her two grown-up daughters. Judge Ingraham, of New York, has decided that there can be no appeal from a decision of the Court of Special Sessions as newly organized. George R. I. Bowden, a prominent New York lawyer, died in London a few days ago of congestion of the brain, in the sixty-third year of his age. A Chicago court was enlivened the other day by a little "mill" between an attorney and a constable to decide whether or not the former told the truth in calling the latter a thief. An Indiana lawyer recently charged a client $10 for collecting $9, but said he would not press him to pay the other dollar for a few days, if it would be more convenient for him to let it stand. The President has signed the joint resolution appropriating one year's salary of an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court for the benefit of the widow and children of the late Edwin M. Stanton. The Massachusetts House of Representatives have, by a two-thirds vote, passed to be engrossed a bill to allow husbands and wives to be witnesses for or against each other, both in civil and criminal suits. The Chancellor of New Jersey has decided that the principal and interest due on a mortgage made prior to the passage of the legal tender act in 1862 was payable in gold and silver, at the option of the mortgagee. The Pennsylvania legislature has passed a bill authorizing the jury in capital cases to determine by their verdict whether the prisoner shall be punished by death or by imprisonment for a period not less than fifteen years. A father and son, named O'Donnell, have been committed for trial at New York, the former charged with attempted rape on his son's wife, and the son with beating her and driving her from home, on the facts being made known to him. J. M. Gazzam, Esq., of Pittsburgh, Pa., was recently admitted to the United States Supreme Court on motion of Hon. B. F. Butler. The Washington Chronicle states that Mr. Gazzam is the youngest attorney ever admitted to that court. The Massachusetts House judiciary committee have reported a bill to make the annual salary of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and the Associate Justices $6,000: Chief Justice of the Superior Court $5,500, and of Associate Justices $5,200 each. One of the ladies on the late jury at Wyoming writes to a friend that she feels "no serious discomfort from being shut up four days and nights, and would have held out four months rather than be convinced by such an argument as that made by the counsel for the defense." Judge Paxson, of Cincinnati, declares that the law enabling a party in the suit to testify in his own case has produced a frightful increase of perjury, and that it is not an uncommon occurrence for persons to come into the criminal courts completely encased in an armor of perjury. A New Orleans paper laments the decline of the bar in that city, saying that while it has increased to more than four hundred members, candor compels the admission that not one-fourth of them are lawyers in the true sense of the term, but merely attorneys for collecting claims. Brigham Young is desirous of obtaining the decision of the Supreme Court on the constitutionality of polygamy as a part of the Mormon religion, and under the protection of the constitution, which guarantees religious freedom; and professes himself willing to abide by such decision. During a recent session of the Supreme Court (special term), in New York, a thief stole Judge Barnard's hat off the bench, and succeeded in making his escape, without being observed either by the judge, the lawyers or spectators. Judge Barnard once lost an overcoat in the same manner. John C. Breckenridge, in an argument in a criminal case, at Lexington, Ky., denounced the men who belong to the "Ku-Klux" as either idiots or villains, and asserted that he was free from any fear of them, and would readily respond to a summons from the sheriff as one of a posse commitatus to arrest and bring these men to justice. Some months ago an indictment was found against General Burbridge in the District Court for Missouri, since which time Attorney-General Hoar has addressed a letter to the United States attorney at St. Louis, authorizing him to enter a nolle pros. in the case, and adding: "The Secretary of the Treasury has transmitted to me his approval in writing of the discontinuance of the prosecution." In one of Mr. Lincoln's first cases he appeared to defend a man accused of murder. Circumstantial evidence told strongly against the prisoner, but, having suddenly and unexpectedly received succor, Mr. Lincoln arose and said that, as the case stood, he could not look for any thing but a verdict against his client, but he asked permission to put a new and very material witness upon the stand. He then called his witness, who proved to be the "murdered" man. Associate Justice Strong has been assigned to the Third Judicial District, embracing the States of Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware. Associate Justice Bradley has been assigned to the Fifth Judicial District, comprising the States of Georgia, Florida, Albabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas. This district has been, for some time past, attached to the Sixth District, to which Judge Swayne has recently been assigned. At a recent session of the Saco (Maine) Supreme Court, a leading lawyer wished to demonstrate that deeds, not words, show the animus of an action, and accordingly cited to the jury the case of the prodigal "whose father divided his property among his son, two sons, and then said: 'Go work to-day in my vineyard;' and one of them said, 'I go,' but didn't; the other refused, and afterward went." The broad grin on the face of the court and jury convinced the advocate that quoting Scripture was not his forte. Two The county court of Craig, Va., was broken up recently in an unusal manner. When the court met in the morning, the presiding magistrate of the court announced that one of the members of the court had consented to teach a negro school, and for one he would not sit on the bench with such a man. others followed his example, and the court was broken up. At the suggestion of some of the bar, the presiding magistrate procured four other magistrates, and opened the court anew, and considerable business was transacted. At an Indiana divorce case recently, the principals were made to relate the course of their married life, and while recounting how happily they used to live, they began to weep at the recollection. The judge followed suit, the audience joined in, and the court room fluttered with handkerchiefs. When, at length, the emotion was somewhat under control, the still sobbing judge suggested to the husband and wife the propriety of trying married life once more. With a few more tears, they put up their handkerchiefs, left court, and went home together. A farmer in Kansas, who sold a keg of butter to a storekeeper representing the same to be "a prime article," was lately sued by the latter, who declared that the farmer's statement regarding the quality of the butter was incorrect. On the occasion of the trial, the jury took the butter (which was in court) with them when they went out to deliberate. Some crackers were procured, and, the keg being open, they all "pitched in," and after amply satisfying the wants of the inner man, they returned to the court room, and rendered a verdict of "no cause of action." It is said that the Lord Chancellor of England contemplates establishing a sort of legal university, which will grant degrees to law students much in the same manner as the universities at Oxford and Cambridge confer distinctions for proficiency in classical and other acquirements. Lord Hatherly, it is also reported, proposes to create a new court of appeals, which shalĺ take cognizance of all cases, whether in law or in equity, and the members of which shall consist of a president and four judges, two of the latter to be taken from the Court of Chancery and two from the Courts of Common Law. This new court, it is believed, will be the first step toward the suppression of the appellate jurisdiction of the House of Lords. The suit of Mrs. Ruth P. Glenn, a fortune-teller of St. Joseph, Mo., on account of some injury received in an accident on the Hannibal and St. Joseph railroad, was determined recently. She claimed $3,000 as damages. There seemed to be a question involved in her alleged capacity as a fortune teller. On the one hand, if she could foresee the accident, she should scarcely claim negligence on the part of the company where her own was so evident; on the other hand she might have also foreseen that the damages she could recover would fully equal those she could sustain. The defendants alleged that they could show that she had agreed to compromise for $200; but her counsel threatened, if that evidence were offered, to prove her insanity at the time of making the agreement. The court gave her the option of an award of $500, or to bring the whole matter before a jury. Rather than have the case and the patience of 12 men thoroughly tried, she accepted the small fortune of $500 in full for her misfortune, and thereby conclusively proved that there was not a bit of insanity about her. NEW YORK STATUTES AT LARGE.* CHAP. 86. AN ACT to provide for an election of Chief Judge and Associate Judges of the Court of Appeals, and Judges of the Court of Common Pleas of the city and county of New York. PASSED March 22, 1870; three-fifths being present. The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows: SECTION 1. A Chief Judge and six Associate Judges of the Court of Appeals shall be chosen by the electors of the State, on the third Tuesday of May next, pursuant to the judiciary or sixth article of the Constitution. The names of all persons voted for at such election by any elector shall be upon one ballot, which shall designate the person voted for as Chief Judge and the persons voted for as Associate Judges, and no elector shall vote for more than the Chief Judge and four of the Associate Judges. Such ballot shall be indorsed "Judiciary," and the inspectors of election shall provide a box, labeled “Judiciary," in which the ballots shall be deposited. The person receiving the highest number of votes as Chief Judge and the six persons receiving the highest number of votes for Associate Judges shall be deemed chosen at such election. 2. At the same election there shall be chosen by the electors of the city and county of New York three additional judges of the court of common pleas of said city and county, as required by the said sixth article of the Constitution. The names of the persons voted for shall be upon one ballot, which shall be separate from the ballot mentioned in the preceding section, and shall be indorsed "Judiciary, Common Pleas." The inspectors * These laws have been carefully compared with the originals, and may be relied upon as accurate. We have not thought it necessary to take up space by attaching to each the certificate of the Secretary of State which is attached to the copy from which we print. ÉD. L. J. shall keep a box, labeled “Judiciary, Common Pleas," in which the ballots shall be deposited. The three persons receiving the highest number of votes shall be deemed chosen at such election. 23. Notice of such election shall be given and published for not less than four weeks preceding the same. As to the Chief Judge and Associate Judges of the Court of Appeals, the notice shall be given as now required by law in reference to general elections, and as to judges of the said court of common pleas in New York, it shall be given as now required in reference to local elections in that city. No omission of notice shall invalidate any election provided for in this act. §4. At such election the registry of votes, if any such registry of votes be required by the then existing law, prepared and used at the last preceding general or charter election, as the case may be, shall be used, but the inspectors of election shall meet in their several election districts, on the Friday and Saturday preceding the election, to revise, correct and complete, and shall revise, correct and complete, the said registry, in the manner now required by law in reference to general and charter elections, if such registry shall then be required by law. 5. The board of State canvassers shall meet on the second Tuesday of June next, to canvass the votes for Chief Judge and Associate Judges of the Court of Appeals, and shall thereupon proceed according to existing laws; and except as in this act otherwise provided, all laws in force at the time in respect to the holding of elections, the qualifications of voters, the punishment for illegal voting, the canvassing and return of the votes, and all laws prescribing the duties of inspectors, officers and boards in reference to elections, shall apply to the elections authorized by this act, so far as the same shall be applicable thereto. Any vacancy in the office of inspector of election, in any election district in the State, shall be filled in the manner provided by law, on or before the day of such election. 36. The additional judges of the Court of Common Pleas of the city and county of New York, to be elected pursuant to this act, shall enter upon their official duties on the first Monday of July next, and shall take the oath of office on or before that day. §7. The Chief Judge and Associate Judges of the Court of Appeals shall meet at the capitol, in the city of Albany, on the first Monday of July next. They shall then, or before that time, take the oath of office, and shall thereupon enter upon their official duties. § 8. Every person elected Chief Judge or Associate Judge of the Court of Appeals, whether at the first or any subsequent election, and every person hereafter elected Justice of the Supreme Court, Judge of the Superior Court of the city and county of New York, or of the Court of Common Pleas of said city and county, or of the Superior Court of the city of Buffalo, or the city court of Brooklyn, or of any county court, shall, within ten days after he enters on the duties of his office, make and sign a certificate in which he shall state his age and the time when his official term will expire, whether by effluxion of a full term or by reason of the disability of age prescribed in the Constitution. The certificate shall be filled in the office of the Secretary of State; and the Secretary of State shall keep in his office a record in which shall be stated the naine of every person elected or appointed to any office in this section specified, and the time of the commencement and termination of his official term. 29. When the official term of any justice or judge of the courts mentioned in the last preceding section, except county judges, will expire at the close of any year, by the effluxion of time or the disability of age, the successor of such justice or judge shall be chosen at the preceding general election. Vacancies otherwise occurring in the said offices shall be filled in the manner prescribed in the ninth section of said sixth article of the Constitution 10. This act shall take effect immediately. The Albany Law Journal. ALBANY, APRIL 9, 1870. REPORTS OF THE COURT OF APPEALS. The recent reports of cases in this court, except that of Mr. Hand, are an outrage upon the court, the profession, and the world. For instance: In Gilbert v. Gilbert (1 Keyes, 159; 34 Howard's Prac. 142) the opinion of Mr. Justice INGRAHAM Was a dissenting opinion. The order of the General Term granting a new trial was in fact reversed, and the judgment on the report of the referee affirmed. (26 Howard's Prac. Rep. 603.) Substantially a contrary rule to that laid down by Mr. Justice INGRAHAM in his dissenting opinion had been established by the court in Sernon v. Seaman (29 New York Rep. 598), and see Brown v. Jones (46 Barbour, 100). In Mayor, etc., v. Erben (38 New York Rep. 305), the opinion of Judge HUNT, published, was a dissenting opinion. The judgment below (10 Bosworth, 189) was affirmed as to Erben as well as to the other defendant. (35 Howard's Prac. Rep. 647.) In Crounse v. Fitch (6 Abb. Prac. Rep. N. S. 185) the opinion of Judge GROVER was a dissenting opinion, The judgment was reversed (35 Howard's Prac. Rep. 645) upon the ground that the court could not be certain the admission of the evidence referred to in the last head-note had not prejudiced the defendant. In Taylor v. Bradley (39 New York Rep. 144-6) the writer was recently informed by one of the most eminent and careful of the judges who took part in the decision that the court did not decide that opinions of witnesses as to the value of a contract like that in controversy were admissible; that Judge GROVER wrote an opinion to the contrary upon this point, and the question was not passed upon, the judgment being reversed upon other grounds. It is true the head-notes of the report of the case do not show the court decided that such opinions were admissible, but the opinion of Judge WOODRUff so holds, and there is no note or memorandum by the reporter that the entire court did not concur in the proposition. This being so, according to the cases of James v. Patten (6 New York, 9), and Oakley v. Aspinwall (13 New York Rep. 500), where two or more points are discussed in the opinions delivered on the decision of a cause, and the determination of either point in the manner indicated in such opinions would authorize the judgment pronounced by the court, the judges concurring in the judgment must be regarded as concurring in such opinions upon all the points so discussed, unless some dissent is expressed or the circumstances necessarily lead to a different conclusion. We are informed that, in consequence of this report, on a re-trial of the case at the Chenango Circuit, the Circuit Judge felt compelled to rule that, instead of the witnesses describing the farm and the cows, stating whether the season was favorable or unfavorable, wet or dry, and stating facts upon which the jury were to estimate the damages, the witnesses were by these opinions substantially made the jury, and the latter were left to determine simply the question as to which of the witnesses had guessed most correctly upon facts known, or supposed to be, by the witnesses, but not proven to the jury. In Flora v. Carbeau (38 New York Rep. 111, 112,, instead of a statement of facts, the first part of Judge WOODRUFF's opinion seems to be duplicated. Several cases are twice reported in Keyes. To such an extent is this so, that even the editor feels called upon in the last volume to apologize for this careless ness. These are errors which we have casually discovered without any systematic examination of the reports and other sources of information to determine whether or not there are others. It is highly probable there are. The head-notes to these cases have already gone into the State Digests, and will soon appear in the United States Digest, upon which the bar of the Union depend. To say nothing of the disgrace thus brought upon the highest tribunal of our State, the consequences of such errors can neither be foreseen nor appreciated. Among them, however, may be mentioned erroneous advice by counsel to clients, involving them in serious troubles and losses, and perhaps ruin. When the courts of a State or country have given a construction of its statutes, those of another will, ordinarily, consider the question settled by such decision (Connecticut, etc., v. Cleveland, etc., 26 Howard's Prac. Rep. 225), and the unwritten law of another State or country (if not, as by our Code, prima facie proven by the production of the reports themselves) may be proved by experts, who testify from the reports and their knowledge, that they are in current use in the State where they are published. (Story's Conflict of Laws, ? 642.) Suppose the section of our statute relative to uses and trusts, involved in Gilbert v. Gilbert, supra, to be in controversy in the courts of Illinois, of England, or of France, and the report of that case in Keyes produced and proven; or that the courts of France should be called upon, in an action upon a transaction occurring here, to determine the points involved in Mayor v. Erben, as our courts were the French law relative to the marriage contract in Barrati v. Welsh (24 New York Rep. 157), although that case strictly, perhaps, depended upon the Code Napoleon. Would not the party rightfully entitled to judgment, by the production of our reports, be wrongfully defeated? How are the profession, even of our own State, to know what has been decided? The evil cannot be entirely remedied, but it may be alleviated by the publishers themselves reprinting the first leaves of the cases erroneously reported, drawing lines across the head-notes, adding a foot-note on the first page of the case, and furnishing the leaves to those who have purchased the volumes, and to the State Librarian, to be sent to exchanges for insertion instead of the leaves first published. In the late imprints of 38th New York Reports, the publishers have added a correction at the end of the case. This is, practically, valueless; for, during the hurry of a circuit or argument, there is no time to read the case through to ascertain the error. Besides, the profession should not be compelled to spend the time necessary to read a long opinion only to find in the end that it is delusive and worthless. |