tion of the court, or they may be ordered to abide the event.

§ 50. When allowed, the costs are as follows:

1. On giving judgment according to the determination of the court of conciliation, or modifying the same, not less than ten nor more than fifty dollars;

2. On vacating or referring back the determination, not less than ten, nor more than twenty-five dollars.

§ 51. Immediately upon entering judgment, the clerk must annex together and file the papers returned by the court of conciliation and a copy of the judgment, which constitute the judgment roll.

§ 52. A judgment entered as provided in sections 19, 20, 48 and 51, has the same effect and is to be enforced in the same manner as a judgment rendered in an action in the county court, or if in the city and county of New-York, in the court of common pleas of that city.

III. The last point of difference between the undersigned and his associates is, as to the name by which the writ of habeas corpus shall be hereafter known. It is included among the state writs, as they are defined in the code, and it is provided in regard to it, that it may be known as the writ of deliverance from imprisonment. Civil Code, p. 546, Section 1306. While the undersigned is not disposed to attach much importance, either to the retention or change of name of a particular proceeding, he regards the change in respect to the writ of habeas corpus, as not only unnecessary but inexpedient. It is known by this name in the constitution, which provides

that "the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when, in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require its suspension. (Const. art. 1, sec. 4.) By this name, it is known also, in the constitution of the United States, and it is believed, in the constitution of every state in the Union. The attempt to change it, therefore, rises in importance, far above any other change, the operation of which can be felt in this state alone. Known, as it is, by this name, it is used throughout the whole confederacy, and although, by a reference to our statutes, its identity might possibly be ascertained, and any inconvenience from the change, thus obviated, the undersigned deems it better to leave it as it is.

In conclusion, the undersigned regrets the necessity under which he is placed, of dissenting in any respect from the views of his associates. He has not done so, in the few instances embraced in this report, but upon the most conscientious convictions of duty. It is some consolation to him, however, to know that these points of difference are not such, as to conflict with the integrity of the system which he has aided in preparing, and which, in its complete form, he unites with his associates in confidently presenting for the approbation of the legislature. From the moment when his official labors commenced, to the present, he has anxiously looked forward to the time when the simplification of legal procedure was to be attained; and he rejoices, that at length he is permitted to unite in presenting a system which, whatever may be its imperfections, can at least claim that it has simplicity and truth for its means, and the attainment of substantial justice for its end.

Respectfully submitted,

DAVID GRAHAM.

Albany, December 31, 1849.