Pioche daily record. [volume] (Pioche, Nev.) 1872-1876, 1875-05-22
A SCENE IN THE UNITED STATES
SUPREME COURT.

The late occurrence OF an Incident III
the United States Supreme Court sug-
gests the suspicion that partlzan politics
and not law. still exercises sinister intlu-
ence on the proceedings of that august
tribunal. Some years ago rampant
majority in Congress so tempered and
interfered with the personnel and consti- |
tuition OF that court that it was broadly |
asserted that the alterations were made
for the express purpose of influencing |
the decisions of the court. In fact. the
charge was scarcely denied by the lead
ers of the dominant party. These dis
graceful rumors again became current
when Justices Strong and Bradley were
added to the court. Their appointment
was stated to be for the direct object of
reversing the greenback decision that
had been rendered by the same court.
Whether the charge was true or not, the
fact is that they did reverse the former
ruling of the court, proceeding on the
part OF m appellate tribunal, peculiarly
opposed to our system of Jurisprudence,
in which the enforcement of the doctrine
of stare decisis is believed to be essential
for the furtherence of the ends of justice.
The evil of court of last resort ire
quently changing its decision in cases
where the facts are analogous, and the
law governing the matter is of the same,
is of so pronounced AMI deplorabl6 a
character that all courts of repute
prefer to stand by their former de-
cisions rather than to cause the
dangerous uncertainty produced by
reversal. II this is the rule
in separate cases, how much more strong
ly does the reason of the rule apply when
the same case is involved, However
this risk was run, the rule was broken
and its reason set at defiance. Judges
Strong and Bradley were appointed for
that purpose, they did their work and
earned their reward. However, to re-
turn to the matter in hand. On the
opinion OF the Court as to the validity of
a decision made by some military courts
established by Butler in New Orleans.
Judge Field dissented and read long
opinion, in which he used language some
what more animated than usually ap-
pears in judicial opinions. Justice Strong
did not like the tenor of Fields remarks
and the two Judges are said to have ut
tered words not calculated to please each
other. The incident is not pleasant and
again excites that dsagreeable suspicion.
that politics and not law may assist il
the determination of causes in so high
and important tribunal as the court O
last resort in great and powerful nation
We do not say that it is so, we trust ant
pray that it is not. But Judge Field
far too sound aud learned lawyer for hi
opinions not to have an immense weight
While on the Supreme Bench of Cali
fornia, his decisions then promulRate
to great extent form the present com
mon law of that State and indeed Of Ne
vada. Since he has occupied the pos
ton of ono OF the Supreme Judges of tn
U. S. his opinions have all been marke
by the same thorough knowledge {
legal lore. the same commanding grasp {
the subject, the same admirable power {
accurate application OF general principles
the whole clothed in style which a
present has no equal in the Unitet
States for simplicity, clearness and ele
gance. In style, in ability as in learn
ing, Judge Field is the very Caesar Of tn
bar of the United States. We do no
say this because we admire or esteer
the Judge in other respects, for we Gel
tainly do not. But in law case Judg
Field is facilis princeps. To use jude
CAREERS expression, Field is saturate
in law, with wonderful ability in its a.
plication." These considerations eau:
US to place reliance on Judge Field
dissenting opinion as more likely to co
Etctly state tue law VI tue case 'u"u VI
opposing opinion of the Court. Z
pecially when he disregards the staid d
corum of judicial etiquette and us
sharp expressions of disapproval, Dol
as regards an important public man fl
uring in the case and his brother judge
When Judge Field took SO unusual
step he must have been moved there
by strong and commanding reaso
which we should be far more inclined
respect than the antagonistic decisit
over which hovers painful imputatiC
of influences other than the strict la
governing the case.