N.J. Constitutional Convention: Vol. 4, Page 48

that we have had here. The decisions of the English court are frequently cited here in this country and relied upon. Of course, they are getting less and less important as the years go by, but I think the general opinion of the bar in this country is that the practice in England is eminently reasonable, not historical; it is reasonable and fair. I think the only criticism you may hear is the expense involved, but I think that can be worked out.

COMMITTEE MEMBER: I thought the tendency was to get this judicial system streamlined.

(Discussion among several members)

VICE-CHAIRMAN: May I suggest, Mr. McCarter, that you give us the highlights.

MR. McCARTER: There are only two or three things that I would like to say. In the 1944 draft the Chief Justice was a legal czar and he assigned the people to this branch and that branch. It would seem to me that this plan, where the duties are divided rather than vested in one judicial czar, would avoid putting an awful lot of power in one man. It might be very difficult to get the right kind of action with one man, whereas if we have three, then the powers are not so concentrated. I do not think there is anything further I wish to say.

I am sorry to say, Mr. Chairman, that it was impossible for me to have printed matter at this meeting due to an unfortunate incident, whereby my brief case with all my papers was left in Atlantic City and I did not get it back until a short time ago. However, if it is agreeable with you, I will have printed matter made up. What is the deadline?

VICE-CHAIRMAN: Technically, it is the seventh of July, but actually, if you get it here within the next month we will be happy to accept it. Thank you very much. ... I might point out that it is the principles which Mr. McCarter advocates that we are primarily interested in. Frankly, we are not too concerned with the language, because when we get to that we will try to draw something on our own and we will have the principles which we recommend.

Mr. Herbert J. Hannoch, I understand, is also speaking for the State Bar as to specific items for which he has recommendations. ... Please pass these copies to the Secretary and the rest of the members.1 This proposal, dealing with the prerogative writs, appears in the Appendix.

MR. HERBERT J. HANNOCH: Mr. Chairman, I speak on behalf of the State Bar Association and direct my remarks exclusively to one subject, and that is the subject of prerogative writs, a very, very technical subject.

While you may have a lot of controversial matters, I am certain that with very few exceptions there is unanimity in the thought


Previous Page in Book ********* Table of Contents *********** Next Page in Book