N.J. Constitutional Convention: Vol. 4, Page 727


Stryker, Tams & Horner(Lindabury, DePue & Faulks) National Newark Building 744 Broad Street, Newark 2, N. J. 

July 28, 1947
 Mrs. Gene W. Miller, Secretary Committee on the Judiciary Convention Hall Rutgers University New Brunswick, New Jersey

Dear Mrs. Miller:

I have read with much interest the tentative draft of the Judicial Article of the proposed new Constitution. I shall be unable to appear at the public hearing as I can not leave Nantucket until Friday, next.

I have heretofore expressed to the Committee my views with reference to the retention of the Court of Chancery. I regret that the Committee has ignored the opinions expressed by the Chief Justice in behalf of the Supreme Court, of the Chancellor, of numerous bar associations and of many experienced lawyers in favor of the retention of the Court of Chancery. I also regret that the Committee, since it recommends the abolition of the Court of Chancery, has not seen fit to recommend the permanent assignment of judges to the Equity Division. In my opinion, the administration of equity will be seriously and adversely affected if the Article as drafted by the Committee should be adopted.

With respect to some other provisions of the tentative draft

1. Paragraph 4 of Section IV abolishes the prerogative writs and provides that in lieu thereof review shall be afforded by the General Court as of right, except in criminal cases. In our present practice the prerogative writs serve many purposes other than the mere review of decisions; e.g., the writ of quo warranto is used to oust persons in office who are not or who have ceased to be de jure officers; it is also used to terminate franchises of corporations upon the ground that franchises once lawfully held have been forfeited and also on the ground that the franchises exercised have never been lawfully acquired.

Our writ of mandamus is used to compel the performance of administrative functions.

Our writ of certiorari is used to remove indictments into the Supreme Court in order that a motion for a foreign jury may be

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