The Manitowoc pilot. [volume] (Manitowoc, Wis.) 1859-1932, 1880-04-01
JUDGE McLEAN'S RECORD

(IwO Rivers ChrCniCle)
Some Of our friends of the legal profess
sion have called our attention to Judge
McLean's record as disclosed in the last
volume of the published decisions of the
Supreme Court of this state. Ten causes
We're appealed from this circuit and came
on for argument in the Supreme Court
at the January term, 1879; eight of them
| were reversed and only ttCO were affirm
ed. These causes can be found in Vol.
46 of Wisconsin Reports, and, to facili-
tate the examination, should any one de-
sire to verify our statements, we give a
list of the causes:
Elmore VS.. Hill. Reversed.
Carl VS.. Shcb. d F. d. L. Il. X. Co. Reversed.
Upper vs.. HuSOn. Reversed.
Wood IS. Blythe. Reversed.
Meyers vs.. Rahte, ct. al. Reversed.
Musgat VS.. Pumpelly. Reversed.
Ryan vs.. ms. Co. Reversed
Godfrey VS.. Thornton. Reversed.
Ready VS.. Huebner Affirmed.
Amos vs.. City of Fond du Lac. Affirmed.
Such is the record as officially report
ed and published. Comment ought to
he unnecessary. But as Judge Mclean
is endeavoring to secure his reelection,
it is due to the public to add that this
record was made after ten years of expe-
rience on the bench. 1t canpot be ex-
cused by the plea Of inexperience. We
wish to be understood as giving the
Judge credit, In the fullest measure, of
haYing acted honestly and given the best
decisions he was able to render. But
the question is, has be done well enough?
Is he, on his own record, entitled to Q
third term" Is change. in any event,
without considering Col. Gilsou's stand
ing as lawyer, likely to make matters
worse? 1t needs to be stated also, that.
in general, cases reversed in the Supreme
Court come back for a new trial, thus in
creasing the burdens of taxation for judi-
ciai expenses, as it costs each county a
hundred dollars and upwards day to re-
try the reversed cases, IL which a new
trial is ordered. 1t is of course fair to
presume that the record in former years,
when Judge Mclean was less experience
ed, must have been still worse. But lest
it should be said that Judge Mclean was
unusually unfortunate III the last volume
of reports, we further state that we are
informed by those who ought to know,
that, at the August term of 1879, the
Supreme Court had before it nine cases,
appealed from this and kewaunee coun-
ties, and that, of these nine, seven were
reversed aud Two affirmed. The exact
proportion of reyersals i'll causes from
other counties Of the circuit at the same
term, We are unable to give, but we are
informed that it was no less.
In view of these facts. IS l. frue that
the circuit cannot place better ability on
the bench? Must our circuit be the
laughing stock of the rest OF the state?
We have sent one man from this circuit
to the Supreme bench whose standing
there is honorable, beyond question.
Did his departure leave US nothing bat
the dregs Of the legal nrofessionl Did
his example during twenty-five years Of
practice in this Circuit excite no emula-
tinn? We refuse to believe it. Let US
have changel Matters cannot be made
worse. Excuses and apologies may be
personal solicitations may be re-
sorted 10, but we have heard no one give
any good reason why Judge Mclean
should be re elected.