664 



NEW JERSEY. 



STATE OP NEW JERSEY, EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT, ) 

 TBENTON, January 27, 1819. j 

 To the Senate : 



The amendment to the Constitution which removed 

 the appointment of the lay Judges of the Inferior 

 Courts of Common Pleas from the joint meeting of 

 the Legislature, and committed their selection to the 

 Governor, with the advice and consent of the Senate, 

 was intended to elevate the character of those courts, 

 and to remove the appointment as far as possible from 

 merely partisan influences. The feeling of the great 

 mass of the people of this State is s I believe, strongly 

 against a strictly partisan composition of tne courts. 

 Our Supreme Court and that of Errors and Appeals 

 have long, if not always, been non-partisan in their 

 character, and it is not unreasonable to suppose that 

 the high reputation they so justly enjoy is in no small 

 degree due to this fact. It is my firm conviction that 

 one of the greatest evils which can befall a community, 

 especially in a republic, is a strictly partisan judiciary. 

 Something more is necessary than that the judiciary 

 should be really pure, impartial, and just : it is also 

 requisite that the people should believe them to be so, 

 and that they should be convinced that no uninten- 

 tional or unconscious party prejudice should work 

 injury to any seeking justice. I believe that, if the 

 judiciary of any nation or state is entirely composed 

 of any one political party, it will often be difficult to 

 convince members ot the adverse party that they can 

 always obtain even-handed justice. 



The Inferior Courts of the Common Pleas are now 

 composed of two members of one political party and 

 of one member of the other, and it happens that it 

 now for the first time falls to the lot of a Governor of 

 this State to decide whether this condition of affairs 

 shall continue, or whether only one party shall be rep- 

 resented in these courts. \V ith a deep sense of my 

 duty as the Chief Executive of this Commonwealth, 

 whose province it is to render exact and equal justice 

 to all its people, I have determined to preserve the non- 

 partisan character of the judiciary. I do this with the 

 confident hope and expectation that both political par- 

 ties will maintain this policy in the future, and that 

 the precedent will be approved and followed by my 

 successors in office, to wnatever political party they 

 may belong. 



Very respectfully, 



GEOKGE B. McCLELLAN, Governor. 



The nominations and letter were referred to 

 the Judiciary Committee of the Senate, a ma- 

 jority of whom subsequently presented a report 

 to the Senate, approving in strong terms the 

 views of the Governor. They then proceed to 

 say: 



Agreeing so fully as we do with the sound public 

 policy expressed by the Governor in his admirable 

 message, your committee feel constrained, in order to 

 fully carry out his views, to recommend that his Excel- 

 lency's nominations for law Judges of the Courts of 

 Common Pleas in the counties of Essex, Monmouth, 

 Middlesex, and Mercer be not confirmed by the advice 

 or consent of the Senate. 



The Governor may have overlooked the fact that by 

 an act of 1878 the number of lay Judges was reduced 

 in all counties having not more than 50,000 inhabi- 

 tants, and that reduction takes effect in the three coun- 

 ties last named during the present year ; and were the 

 nominations confirmed for these counties, the bench 

 in each would be unanimously of one political party, 

 and must so remain for some time to come. Such a 

 result his Excellency the Governor would doubtless 

 deplore, for the reasons given in his message that " one 

 I of the greatest evils that can befall a community is a 

 strictly partisan judiciary, and that in such cases it 

 would be difficult to convince members of the adverse 

 party that they could always obtain even-handed jus- 

 tice.]' _ Your committee believe that the courts, whose 

 administration so directly affects the personal interests 



of the people as the Courts of Common Pleas, Quar- 

 ter Sessions, and Orphans' Courts, should be especially 

 free from the slightest suspicion that any uninten- 

 tional or unconscious party prejudice shall work injury 

 to any_ one seeking justice therein. We believe ear- 

 nestly in the principle of a non-partisan judiciary, and 

 in its fair and practical application to the counties 

 named and to all others. 



The judiciary at the present time in said counties 

 of Monmouth, Middlesex, and Mercer is non-partisan, 

 and your committee have failed to see or learn any 

 reason why that condition of affairs should be changed 

 by appointments which set the principle of a non-par- 

 tisan judiciary at defiance upon the very moment of 

 its promulgation. 



The nomimation for law Judge of Essex County is 

 largely open to the same objections already stated. 

 The administration of justice in that largely populated 

 county, at least in criminal matters, devolves almost 

 entirely upon the Court of Quarter Sessions, which 

 would become, by the appointment made by the Gov- 

 ernor, entirely of one party, were this nomination con- 

 firmed. 



While your committee, therefore, have deemed it 

 wise to adopt the expressed views of the Governor and 

 to cooperate with him in whatever proper appoint- 

 ments lie may make in accordance therewith, they are 

 constrained, for the foregoing and other satisfactory 

 reasons, to advise the rejection of the nominations 

 mode for law Judges of said counties of Essex, Mon- 

 mouth, Middlesex, and Mercer, as inconsistent with 

 the letter and principles of the message. 



The nominations of the Governor for lay Judges in 

 the counties of Burlington. Camden, Cape May. Cum- 



. _ 



berland, Gloucester, Hudson, Huntcrdon, Warren, 

 Union, Bergen, and Morris, making a minority Ke- 

 publican representation in each of said counties respec- 

 tively j and Toeing entirely in accord with the principles 

 enunciated in his message, it is recommended that 

 they be confirmed. 



The minority of the committee fit the same 

 time presented a report on the subject to the 

 Senate, of which the following is an extract: 



By usage and of right, the nomination of persons 

 to hold these several judicial offices belongs to the 

 Governor, the Senate having only the power to reject 

 or confirm his nominations. The Governor, together 

 with his message communicating these nominations, 

 also presented a special message, laying down certain 

 principles which he considered should govern the Ex- 

 ecutive in making judicial appointments, which were 

 on enlargement upon the policy adopted by previous 

 Democratic Governors, looking toward a non-partisan 

 judiciary in this State. This fact is alluded to simply 

 because the majority of the Judiciary Committee, to 

 whom were referred as well the special message as the 

 nominations, have seen fit to use words carefully culled 

 from that message, as the basis of their report advising 

 the rejection of the nominations of the four Democrats 

 for law Judges and the confirmation of the eleven 

 Kepublicans for lay Judges. If the dominant party 

 in the Senate are willing to accept the principles laid 

 down by the Governor a& the correct one, and by 

 which they hereafter intend to be guided, they should 

 at least be fair and accept it as he announced it. 



Governor McClellan, in his special message to this 

 Senate, refers solely to the lay Judges of the Common 

 Pleas, and his language is so plain that none can be 

 deceived, save willingly. He says, " The Inferior 

 Courts of the Common Pleas are now composed of two 

 members of one political party, and of one member of 

 the other, and it happens that it now for the first time 

 falls to the lot of a Governor of this State to decide 

 whether this condition of affairs shall continue, or 

 whether only one party shall be represented in these 

 courts." To what can this language, which is the 

 keynote of the message, be construed to apply, save to 

 the lay Judges ? OF whom can it be said that two 

 members are now of one political party, and one of 



