Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 02.pdf/311

have they been succeeded by such men as Beardsley and Jewett. Our Supreme Court, under these eminent men, may be declared the finest fruit of the system of an appointed judiciary." In the early years of the Court for the Correction of Errors, which was a half-way copy of the Lords' Court, the Senators de livered few opinions. The Chancellor and one

or more of the law judges usually led off, and the Senators fre quently contented themselves with vot ing. Later, frequent written opinions were delivered by DeWitt Clinton, William H. Seward, Gulian C. Verplanck, Alonzo C. Paige, Luther R. Bradish, William Ruger, Erastus Root, Harvey Putnam, John A. Lott, Lyman Sherwood, Eli jah Rhoades, Henry W. Strong, Abraham Bockes, John Porter, 4 Addison Gardiner, Hiram F. Mather, Na thaniel P. Tallmadge, John W. Edmonds, Albert H. Tracy, GREENE C. Leonard Maison, Samuel L. Edwards, David Wager, Gabriel Furman, John Crary, Charles Stebbins, Cadwallader D. Colden, John Sudam, John C. Spencer. Those of Putnam, Verplanck, Spencer, Colden, Edmonds, Tracy, Edwards, and Maison were numerous, very learned, and very care fully elaborated. Senator Verplanck's were among the most numerous, and are among the most learned and elegant judicial essays ever written in this State. Verplanck was a man of remarkable scholarship, and acquired an enviable reputation both in law and letters. But in 1846 serious fault was found with

the judicial system, and the following were the main grounds of objection to it : — 1. It was inadequate to keep pace with the litigation. 2. The people were disposed to elect their judges by popular vote rather than have them appointed by the governor. 3. The Court for the Correction of Errors was distrusted as a fluctuating and partisan body, too numerous and unwieldy, contain ing many who had no knowledge of law and yet were not apt to yield to the opinions of the lawyers. 4. The Court of Chancery was regard ed as tedious, costly, and capricious, and as subjecting the suitor to the proverbial dan ger of two stools. 5. The limitation of the judicial tenure to the age of sixty years was regarded as extremely unwise, as was demonstrated in the case of Kent; and at the same time it was felt that it would be unwise to BRONSON constitute the term one for life. The Constitution of 1846 abolished the Court for the Correction of Errors and the Court of Chancery, and reorganized the Su preme and Circuit Courts, and created, first, a Court of Appeals of eight judges, four to be chosen by the electors of the State, to sit for eight years, and four to be selected by the Governor from the class of justices of the Supreme Court having the short est time to serve, and to sit one year each; second, a Supreme Court, with general jurisdiction in law and in equity, consist ing of thirty-two justices, to be chosen