Legal Reform

Last weck our remarks were on the Expenses of the Law, showing that under the present system a poor man hnd no chance at all in a protracted and obstinate contest with the rich, on acïcount of the endiess delavs and accurnulaled costs of legal proccedings; and wc expressed the opinión that these expenses might be very grently reduced. We also argued íhnt the parlies to a suit should pay oZthe expenses of it, wbereas the County nnd State now pay Trom thirty to two hundred dollars on each contested case, wbich is 1 lected for the most part from the pockets of peaceable citizens who have no interest whatevcr in the strifes for which they ave nnmially assessed. We shall close this sarlea of a rífeles by suggesling some material amendment in the present practice of tho COL'RTS OF LAV 1. Every case should be tried on the day in which it is made returnable, unJes adjourned for a sofficient reason. - This is now the prnctice in Justrce's courts. But when a case is entered in the Circnit Court, thero is no knowing when it wiïT be called. Suppose there are fifty cases on the docket to be caïled previously. No living mortal enn teil how soon they will be despatched. Tiie first case may oceupy a week, or the wholc fifty be laid over, or be settled, or othenvise despatched in threeor four days. Henee the plainliff and defendant rnnst each be on hand evcry day witb all their witnesses, for six, eighf , or ten dnys, and then, perhaps, the ease will not be reached at all that session, or it will be pot over on application of oneof the parties. At the next term, both the parties and their witnesses are again taken from their private business, no matter how pressing it may be, and are compelled to attend four, six, or ten days more iiH tbc case is fairly adjusted. The system in vol ves a heavy expense to the parties, and a great inconvenienco nnd loss of time to the witnesses, while it is of no service toany body. Th'is great evü should be remedied. It can be done only by allowing the Court toappoint aday fortlie hearing of each case, in the same manner that Justiccs now do; and would, doubtloss, require an alteration in the organization of the Courts. 2. The testimony of the witnesses sho'd be taken down in writing by the clerk of he Courl, in the same manner that is now practiced in Chancory suits; and in case of an appeal, a transcript of this estimony should be sent up to the superior Court, instoad of requiring the aitendance of the witnesses a second time. Tho expense of this would be far less than night be supposed at first sight; the time occipied in the trial of the case would je no longer than it now is, whilethe witnesses would be hindered from their business only one or two days, instead of six, eight, or twelve, as at present.'S. No ndjournment of a cause should be pcrmitted in any case without actual and sufficient cause; nor should the final decisión of the cause bc delayed more than six months, unless in some extreme cases where the testimony could not be obtained within that time. The general tendency of delay is to defeat the ends of justice.4. The Chanccry Courls should be abolished. The business transacted in them could be done as well in the other Courts, at a far less expense. No man rationally think of comraencing a contested suit in Chancery for less than a hundred dollars, and the -expenses often amount to many hundreds. They are a trap and a snare to the ignorant and uneasy, while many whowould gledly keep out arcdriven into this vortex by the force of circumstances, without ever knowing how they they shall get out. 5. It should be made optional with the parties to have a jury, or not. Now in the Circuit Courts, thoy are compelied to have one, and to pay the expenses of it, whether they wish lor it or not.6. Each party should have the privilege of using the other party as a witness, as is now practiced in Chancory suits. - This proposition wili undoubtedly shock the prejudicesof many at first thought, but we are satisfied that full and substantial juslice cannot be rendered until the practico shall be generaüy adopted. Such an alteration in legal practice is dcmandby the enlightoned spirit of the nge. Many transnctions take place between individuals which are known only to ihemselves, or which cannot well bo pïoved by any other persons. Bcsides, the present practice strongly tends to relax the moral principies of the parties, and of the whole cotnmunity. Take tho case of two farmers who usually are good neighbors, but having become angry ihey will not settle without the law. The defendant is a Presbyterian deacon, aad the plaintiiF is a Baptist man. Both parties. knowing that they shall get only what they can prove, bring in charges at extravant prices, and also charge for articles or services that otherwise they would have been asharned to mention. The object of each is to prove the greatest account. The plnintifl' reads over his charges, to which the deacorpleads the general issue - that is, he demes every one of them, and gives notice of an account to balance. "VVhat!"says the Baptist man, "do you deny tfoat [ let you have such and such'articles - which weighed so much, nnd the pricc was to be somuch n pound? Vou knotv thal we talkedthe matter over and agreed on 11 the particulars." To which the deacon replies, ':If yon can prove it, I will pay it: othenvise, not. I admit nothing." "Well," says the Baptist, "you are a pretty professor of religión to deny thnt you ever had the ïeast article of me, when you know you did." But after thinking a few moments he finds that the only way he can stand any chance ofobtaíning justice is by denying every thing also: and thus he is driven into practising the very thing he before condemned. Each party denies all his neigbbor's accounf, and proves rbnt he enn of his own; nnd ow'ng to the want of ev'rdence, or the absence of witnesses, nol more than half the charges on cíther side can be provexí, ancí in this hap-haznrd way, the case ís de cided often exactiy the reverse of whaf it woulo hat0 been bad the parties been compelled to tnslífy to the whole trutb.--Such specta'cles are consfantly occurring ín every town: justice is not dispensed, the reïigioos charader of the partïes is injurëcfj anímosities among neíglibors are promoled, nnd" the ïnw, instead of being honoreci and revered as the dis-peuser of justice, is ridicuíed for ífs uncertainty,and becomes the favorite resorl of the crafty, the dishonest and the oppressíve These reauïts, ín our opinión, rould1 be materíally prevented by elicitmg the wFioíe ímth Crom tho narties ibemselvcs.We have now briefïy gane tíiroa'gíi wit?) the suggestíons respectíng Leaí Reform whích we promísedf. We Tmvesbown, ns we ihínTi snccessfully, t!at íhe present systero oí admínísteríng justíce might be greatly nmended, By deciding every case on íts merítsy nccording to equity, so as todo justiccbetween man and mnn: By abolish ing most of the Tcchnicalíiies of the Common Law: By abolishing legal Delcnjs, so that n jiidgmenl may be obtained in ono-fourth of the time now required: By rcducing the Expenses of suits to a very great extent: And by making important altorations in the proceedings of the Courts. The oniy plausible objection we have heard to these alterations of the Law, is, that the present system has been matured by the united wisdom of the wisest and best men of many ages pnt, who have made the law the study of their lives; and can it be wise to throw away this accumulation of valuable rules anJ precedente, and tluis put ourselves upon an ocean of uncertainties, with no olhcr'uidethan some infntuated and fannlica] reíbrmer, wlio has not a tcnth nart of ihc learning he rejects? To this vo rcply that it would not throw mvay a single principie, decisión, or practice thal is valuable. We would retain every one of them. But ihere may be such a thing ns the "accumnlated jolly of ages," and whenever ve find that, we would dispense with it. Besides, i f a similar courseof reasoning wore adopled in other cases, how could there be any improvement? Suppose Luther, instead of thinking for himself, had said that the system of religión then existing. in all its parts was the product of thecombined wisdom of the wisest and best fathers o!' the Church for ages, and was therefore too venerable and exalted to be cal led in question by so humblo an individual as himself: where then would have been the Reformation that he accotnplished? - VVhat improvements can be made in any science or art by those who have such a blind andstupid veneration for the past as to even prohibit all inquiry into the need of any change? The evils which result to the people from our present system ot administering law, in our estimation, are greater than those of any other legalized provisión under which the people of the State suffer, if we except such as arise froin the License System. The Militia trainings are, perhaps, productive of more unmixcd evil. but they are less oppressive in their general results. From wliat wo have learnedof the feelings of Liberty men, we are led to believe that a substantial Legal Reform, is generally desired by them; and the expression of their opinioos upon that and other lopics of State policy, in our opinión, comes legilimalely within the province of the Liberiy party.(17a Last week we menlioned the murdor ufa colored man in India?apoüs, nnd stated that tho Rev. Henry Becchcr had waited on Mr. De Puy, the antislavery editor, to urge him to say nothing about t. Mr. Beccher has since pnblished a statement in the Cincinnati Herald which, if correct, exoncrates him from al] blame. Q The exact number of persons who lost their Uves at the firo in New York has not been ascertained, but the names of ten aro ment on ed in the New York papers, and quite a number wero seriously njured. It is reportcd that there was a considerable qunntity of powder in the building that exploded. Tho occupiers have been arrested, and the matter is being investigaled.