In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

17 Reform of the Judiciary In the confusion produced by the second report on the judiciar y, Vice-President Tompkins introduced his substitute, which would vacate the offices of the high courts. Ogden Edwards was one of several moderates who spoke against this Draconian measure. It was defeated on October 25, 1821,but returned a few days later as part of the Carpenter resolution on the judiciary. Robert Clarke opened the debate for the radicals. Chief Justice Spencer followed with a tired speech addressing the sympathies of the delegates but, in effect, conceding the inadequacy of the present court system he was reluctant to change. The moderate, David Buel, made the most cogent argument against the Carpenter plan. Erastus Root, who surely merits the last word on these debates, renewed his fierce assault until the judicial ramparts of the old constitution fell. The Carpenter resolution passed on the third day of debate, November 4, 1821. Mr. Edwa r ds. I do not conceiv e it proper that a subject of such deep concern should be passed upon without being mor e thoroughly discussed and seriously considered. However lightly our judicial system may be held by some, yet if w e f ail in establishing a good one , the comm unity will sooner or later be made to feel that it is a thing of no ordinary importance. A little reflection must satisfy every man, that in a countr y which is governed solely by laws, as every free government must be, and where those laws can be brought to bear upon the people only through the instrumentality of judges, that the men who ar e to administer those laws should be extremely well qualified to perform those duties. From Reports, pp. 529–31, 602–4,606–10,616–17. Reform of the Judiciary 223 The common law, sir, is so f ramed as to afford a reasonable rule for the regulation of every question which can arise relative to the rights of persons and the rights of things. As it embraces all the transactions which occur in civil society, its rules must necessarily be extremely multifarious. A thorough knowledge of those laws is only to be acquired by long and laborious study; and to enable the comm unity to enjoy the full benefi t of them, it is necessary that they should avail themsel ves of the ser vices of learned men. When our ancestors c ame to this countr y, although they fl ed from the persecutions they exper ienced in their nativ e land, yet such was their attachment to the common law, that they brought it along with them, and subjected their conduct to its r egulation. We have been long fl ourishing under it, administered as it has been by institutions similar to those under which it was nurtured.The mother country is indebted to it for whatever of liberty remains among them: and it is generally admitted, that the judicial establishments are the only sound parts of their government. By the wisdom of the founders of the English government in this state, those institutions were here established, and the consequence has been,that while other states have gone on in a course of experiments, our judicial establishments have remained firm and stable: revered by the people of this state, and admired by those of our sister states.Now, sir, with all this blaze of experience in favour of maintaining those institutions,shall we rudely prostrate them? What oracle is there among us who can afford us a sufficient assurance that we shall benefit by the change? As it r espects myself, sir, I know of none: and I doubt whether any thing short of inspiration could satisfy me of the expediency of making it. Let it not be said, sir, that the change contemplated b y the report on your table, is not material. True, the supreme court is to be continued, but how is it to be with the cir cuits? Let no gentleman deceiv e himself into a belief that it is matter of tr ifling concern who presides there. Who, sir, I would ask, consigns your fellow beings to the gloomy r ecesses of your state prisons? Who dooms them to the sc affold? Under whose presiding genius is it that your juries proceed in the investigation of facts which are to regulate the disposition of y our property? Is it not the cir...

Share