Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1884-04-28
We must Grin and Near II.


turnpike company In Philadelphia deter.
mined to sell 1t to the city and agreed to
give their lawyer "all he could get over
100000. He had viewers put upon the
road and got an award Of $4,000. After
the award had been confirmed by the
court, the discovery Of the facts was
made and the city asked that 1t be set
aside on the ground offraud. The court
held that the proceedings were tainted
with fraud and set them aside. The su'
preme court reversed 1t by majority of
one, deciding that the court had no
power to discharge its judgment. The
city tried again by means Of bill
in equity to get back Its $50, 900, but
Judge Thayer has just declared, in a
spicy review Of the case, that in obedi
ence to the decision Of the supreme
court the bill must be dismissed. He
uncovers his clear opinion that the deci
sion of the supreme court is very queer
law. lie had been taught to believe that
fraud was good cause for the opening
OF any judgment. The supreme court
has in fact plainly 80 declared in other
cases. The Judge seems at loss to know
why it should have concluded to take so
good care Of Lawyer Terry and his big
contingent fee +; a style OF fee which it
has always pretended to denounce. Says
JUDGE Thayer:
Argument is at an end when the court
OF last resort has decided. No new facts
having been disclosed, tho decision upon
the came facts, although in another form
Of proceeding, must necessarily follow that
of the appellate tribunal. No further dis
cussion of the facts seems, therefore, to be
called for, and further inquiry into the mo
rality or legality Of agreements for contin-
gent fees between counsel and client, or
their influence upon the administI alton Of
justice, whether in actions for the collec
tion OF ordinary debts or in claims for un-
liquidated damages, would seem to be out
of place, in view of tho cases cited by the
master. Such agreements, says Justice
Woodward, have frequently attracted
the animadversion Of the supreme |
court, and, he might have added, |
have always been sustained by the su
preme court. 1t is not for us to be wiser
than cur generation, or at any rate, wiser
than the supreme court. We have a right
to our opinions and our own ethics. bu: no
right 10 substitute our own theories 10 the
place OF authoritative decisions. A sub
ordinate court which should begin TO de.
part from it's legitimate sphere of action
and ronounco the fundamental Law which
regulates the motion by the attraction Of
common aud controlling centre would |
sooner or later become lost plead in our |
judicial system. II the city has lost $50,
600, il has the satisfaction at least OF
knowing that it has lost 1t according to
law that is to say, because in the judy
ment OF the supreme court it had ro
case.
The judge has our sympathy. We un
derstand and appreciate fully his feel
ings. They are quite common to people
who are not on the bench, in contem
plating the law they get from there.
We have them oftener than the judges
of the courts below, because we have
them in considering the judgments
of the courts below and above
Judge Thayer is one of the very best of
our common pleas judges, and If they
were all as fit as he to construe the law
there would not be so much merited
damnation dealt out to the judges. In |
truth, il the supreme court judges were
all OF his quality it would be very for
tunate thing for the state. Hisjudgment
upon the law is intrinsically worth more
than that of the majority of the supreme
court, and no doubt the court below was
right and the court above wrong in this
Al IA in pth VI
to say that our supreme court does not |
obtain unlimited confidence in its judg
ments.
Il is the privilege of the defeated suit
OF and lawyer, and, public as 1t is, of the
oyerruled Judge, to doubt the soundness
ofthe supreme courts law and q very
sweet privilege and vast relief it is. We
fear, however, that Judge Thayer IL
poking fun az the city of Philadelphia,
when lie says that it has the satisfaction |
of knowing that it has lost its $50 900
according 70 the supreme courts law
for there is no obtainable satisfaction in |
that reflection. It Is In truth au addi. |
tional aggrayatiOn. IL might be some |
consolation to know that the law had |
done the mischief; but none can be found |
IN assigning + to the supreme cour 5
stupid Interpretation Of the law. Judge |
Thayer knows that his fellow citizens of |
Philadelphia will incline to accept his
law as genuine, which saves them their
$50 900; and he but rubs salt into their
wounds in telling them they may be
comforted in the knowledge that they
are swindled according to law, AS the
supreme court understands it,