N.J. Constitutional Convention: Vol. 4, Page 74

Wednesday, June 25, 1947 (Morning session)

MR. PETERSON: It would be my opinion that basic law and commonsense would prevail in New Jersey.

MR. AMOS F. DIXON: Can a law court issue an injunction?

MR. SCHNITZER: I know of no instance, but here again there is much higher authority present.

MR. PETERSON: Another point I would like to ask, in your number 8 on page 3, all prerogative writs are abolished.1 The reference is to the report of the Essex County Bar Association Committee. See Appendix.

MR. SCHNITZER: That is Mr. Conford's special subject.

MR. PETERSON: I would like to have Mr. Conford answer that.


VICE-CHAIRMAN: We will proceed with Mr. Schnitzer at this time, and you may answer Mr. Peterson later.

MR. PETERSON: Have you any statistics relative to the expense in comparison with New York?

MR. SCHNITZER: With regard to that, I remember at Harvard there was a very well-organized attempt made to develop statistics about New York's administration of justice. In the end, the confession was that the statistics were not a reliable basis for comparison for the reason that records are not uniformly kept, and therefore comparison is difficult.

VICE-CHAIRMAN: Has anyone any further questions?

MR. DIXON: How about the length of time - are there any statistics on the disposition of cases?

MR. SCHNITZER: Yes, but there are not in our own State, so there again comparisons would be difficult.

VICE-CHAIRMAN: In Dr. Temple's report2 Temple, Ralph R. Report on the Constitutional Courts of the State of New Jersey. Submitted to the Commission on Revision of the New Jersey Constitution, July, 1942. (Trenton, 1942). I think you will find a reference to the time it would take to decide a case. That was referred to, and I believe we will have the current report soon.

MR. SCHNITZER: But in that report, if it is the one I have in mind, it was restricted to a certain number of courts, and complaint was again made that records of the respective courts were not properly kept. The point I mean to make is this - the best comparisons are to be made within the same system before and after the change. You will be dealing with the same judicial personnel. I have heard repeatedly the acrimonious suggestion that before creation of the Administrative Officer, the courts of the United States had no immediate clerical supervision over the rate at which they decided their cases. They now do function under such supervision, and the complainant would imply that the practice has changed somewhat merely as the result of unification and business administration.

VICE-CHAIRMAN: I understand that you were one of the

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