JUDGES RECOMMENDED BOTH BY JUDICIAL CONFERENCE AND BY One circuit judge for the second circuit. One district judge for the western district of Louisiana. The following are recommended by the Attorney General, but do not have the recommendation of the Judicial Conference: JUDGES RECOMMENDED BY ATTORNEY GENERAL ONLY One associate justice of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. One district judge for the northern district of Illinois. One district judge for the eastern and western districts of Arkansas. One district judge for the eastern and middle districts of Tennessee. (The Attorney General recommended that this judge should be provided for the eastern, middle, and western districts of Tennessee.) The provision with reference to the third circuit is recommended by the Judiciary Committee because of a special condition which prevails in that circuit, due to the fact that members of the court have failed to take advantage of the right to retire which has been theirs for a number of years. The committee feels that under the circumstances additional personnel is required properly to take care of the work of the circuit. Prior to June 24, 1936, there were four circuit judges in this circuit. An act was approved on that date under which a fifth judge was appointed. The act of June 24, 1936, however, provided that upon the death, resignation, retirement, or disqualification of any judge then in office the vacancy should not be filled and thereafter there should be four circuit judges in that circuit. The bill which is here reported authorizes the appointment of two additional circuit judges, and carries a provision that the two vacancies which shall first occur in the office of circuit judge for the third circuit by the retirement, disqualification, resignation, or death of circuit judges in office on June 24, 1936, shall not be filled. The consequence will be that temporarily there will be seven circuit judges in this circuit and permanently five. Also no circuit judge in this circuit now eligible to retire shall hereafter exercise the powers of a senior circuit judge. EXCERPT FROM REPORT OF THE JUDICIAL CONFERENCE, SEPTEMBER SESSION, 1937 Provision for additional judges in the circuit courts of appeals.-The reports of the senior circuit judges show that in general the circuit courts of appeals are well up with their work. In six of the circuits and in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, no additional judges are now required. It should be noted, however, that in the eighth circuit the court of appeals is able to keep abreast of its work only through the aid of retired judges, of whom there are three. There is no certainty as to the length of time this aid will be available and if, in the future, it should be seriously lessened, the business of that court would require another judge. The Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is up with its work but in view of the severe and disproportionate burden imposed upon its members by its heavy docket, an additional circuit judge is thought to be necessary. The Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is also fully up with its work but it is faced with a probable increase of business, and in view of the extent of the present and future burden upon the court it is felt desirable to have an additional circuit judge. The Circuit Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit is not able with the present number of judges to hear all of the cases as promptly as they should be heard, and an additional circuit judge is necessary. While the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has been able to dispose of its cases, it has been handicapped by the delay in filling vacancies, one of which still remains. The court has been compelled to rely upon the constant assistance of district judges. It is the sense of the conference that it should not be necessary for a court of appeals to call in district judges except in some exigency for a temporary period. Even with the filling of the existing vacancy, the court of appeals of the seventh circuit would still be lacking in a sufficient number of circuit judges to keep abreast of its work, and the appointment of an additional circuit judge is needed. Accordingly, the conference recommends that provision be made for an additional circuit judge in the second, fifth, sixth, and seventh circuits, respectively. Provision for additional district judges.-The conference gave close consideration to the extent of the need for additional district judges, having regard to the volume and character of the work of the district courts and appropriate provision for the prompt disposition of cases. In 1936 the conference recommended that additional judges be provided as follows: One additional district judge for the northern district of Georgia. It will be observed that the last-mentioned district is one of the two districts aside from the District of Columbia) to which the Attorney General has directed special attention as showing serious arrearages. For this district as well as for the others, embraced in the recommendation of the conference last year, no additional judges have yet been provided. The conference renews its recommendation as to the four districts above mentioned. In past conferences, it had been hoped that there would be an improvement in the state of the trial dockets in the eastern district of Michigan, but this hope has not been realized and in view of the arrearages, specially mentioned in the report of the Attorney General, the conference recommends that provision be made for an additional judge. Because of special conditions in the district of Kansas, the conference has concluded that an additional judge is needed there. Other increases are found to be advisable in the southern district of California, the western district of Louisiana, and the northern district of Ohio. In the District of Columbia special conditions demand consideration. In this District, the courts have not only the important Federal cases committed to their jurisdiction, but also the cases which within a State would fall within the jurisdiction of State courts. As, prior to this year, the statute had not provided for the representation of this District in the conference, Justice Groner presented statistics applicable to a period of 7 years. In view of the increasing number of cases and the impossibility of bringing the dockets up to date with the present judicial force, and having regard to the character of the work and the future needs of the District, the conference recommends that provision be made for three additional judges for the District Court for the District of Columbia. Including the recommendations made last year and now renewed, the conference therefore recommends that additional district judges be provided as follows: One additional district judge for the northern district of Georgia. One additional district judge for the eastern district of Louisiana. One additional district judge for the western district of Louisiana. One additional district judge for the southern district of Texas. One additional district judge for the eastern district of Michigan. One additional district judge for the northern district of Ohio. One additional district judge for the western district of Washington. One additional district judge for the southern district of California. One additional district judge for the district of Kansas. Three additional district judges for the District of Columbia. In the remaining 75 districts, it is the opinion of the conference that no additional district judges are now required. EXCERPT FROM REPORT OF THE ATTORNEY GEneral, 1937 The need of an increase in personnel is recognized in the report of the Judicial Conference at the session that convened on September 23, 1937, and which I have the honor to submit herewith. The conference recommended the following per manent increases in judicial personnel: One district judge for the northern district of Georgia. Three district judges for the District of Columbia. The foregoing recommendations are amply justified, and I shall be glad to submit to the appropriate committees of the Congress data bearing upon the propriety and wisdom of still further increases, as follows: One associate justice for the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. One district judge for the eastern and western districts of Arkansas. One district judge for the northern district of California. One district judge for the southern district of Florida or jointly for the northern and southern districts of Florida. One district judge for the northern district of Illinois. One district judge for the district of Massachusetts. One district judge for the district of New Jersey. One district judge for the southern district of New York. One district judge for the eastern district of Pennsylvania. One district judge for the eastern, middle, and western districts of Tennessee. One district judge for the western district of Virginia. All the judgeships recommended both by the Judicial Conference and the Attorney General are included in the reported bill, except one judge for the eastern district of Louisiana, which has already been provided for by a separate act, and one district judge for the district of Kansas which will be reported in a separate bill. The committee has not included in the bill two judgeships recommended by the Attorney General, one for the southern district of Florida, and one for the eastern district of Pennsylvania. An additional judgeship for the northern district of Alabama has been provided by separate act to meet an emergency situation in that district, with the proviso that no successor to the senior judge of the district shall be appointed. SECOND CIRCUIT The second judicial circuit includes the States of Vermont, Connecticut, and New York. There are now five circuit judges in the second circuit and additional help is at times received from Judge Mack, former Commerce Court judge to whom no successor may be appointed and who divides his time between the second and sixth circuits. The Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has by far the largest volume of business of all the circuit courts of appeals. During the year ending June 30, 1937, 648 cases were filed in that court. The second largest volume of business is in the Seventh Circuit in which 351 cases were filed during the same period. The number of appeals per judge filed in the second circuit during the past fiscal year was 130, while the average per judge for the entire country was 65. The second circuit has the same number of judges as the third and eighth circuits with a volume of business more than twice as large as either of them. During the fiscal year ending June 30, 1937, there were 315 cases filed in the third circuit and 257 in the eighth circuit. The ninth circuit has seven judges-two more than in the second circuit, yet during the period in question there were nearly twice as many cases filed in the second circuit as in the ninth circuit, where 332 cases were filed. Prior to 1902 there were three judges in the second circuit. The number was increased to four by the act of April 17, 1902 (32 Stat. 106) and from four to five by the act of January 17, 1929 (45 Stat. 1081). Since the last increase in the number of judges for this circuit, the volume of business has grown from 451 cases filed during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1929, to 648 cases during the last fiscal year. SECOND CIRCUIT FIFTH CIRCUIT The fifth judicial circuit includes the States of Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, aggregating a total area of 531,196 square miles. This circuit ranks third in size, being exceeded in area only by the ninth and tenth circuits. It extends from El Paso, Tex., on the west, to Florida, on the southeast, a distance of over 2,000 miles, more than half of the breadth of the United States. There are now only four circuit judges in the fifth circuit, while the second, third, and eighth circuits have five judges each, and the ninth circuit has seven judges. The number of cases docketed in the fifth circuit during the past fiscal year was somewhat greater than the number docketed in either the third or ninth circuits, and exceeded the number filed in the eighth circuit by nearly 100 cases. Prior to 1930, there were three judges in the fifth circuit. The number was increased to four by the act of June 10, 1930 (46 Stat. 538). The court is required by law (U. S. C., title 28, sec. 223) to hold its sessions at four places, namely, New Orleans, La.; Atlanta, Ga.; Fort Worth, Tex.; and Montgomery, Ala. During the past fiscal year 348 cases were filed in the fifth circuit and 343 disposed of. There were 139 cases pending at the beginning of the year and 144 cases still pending at the end of the year. Only two circuits had a larger number of cases filed therein during the last fiscal year. They were the second and the seventh. The number of appeals per judge filed in the fifth circuit during the past fiscal year was 87, while the average per judge for the entire country was 65. The fifth circuit is the most populous of all the circuits. According to the last decennial census (1930) the population of the States comprising the fifth circuit aggregated 16,956,000. FIFTH CIRCUIT The sixth judicial circuit includes the States of Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky, and Tennessee. There are now four circuit judges in the sixth circuit. The volume of its business is almost as large as that of the fifth circuit, 331 cases having been filed during the past fiscal year; 261 cases were pending at the beginning of the year and 324 cases at the end of the year, while only 268 cases were idsposed of during the year. Approximately the same number of cases were filed in the sixth circuit as in the ninth circuit which has seven judges and more than in the third or eighth circuit, each of which has five judges. The number of appeals per judge filed in the sixth circuit during the past fiscal year was 83, while the average per judge for the entire country was 65. The number of judges in this circuit was three prior to 1928 and was increased to the present number by the act of May 8, 1928 (45 Stat. 492). Since the last increase in the number of judges for this circuit, the volume of business has grown |