Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1885-04-13
rHr SUPREME COURT.
Eai,pr % tAe Rsa,.l1r.

a
Philippi ~cIiicizes our Supreme Court TOR
length Of opinions, and the incorporation IN
them OF extracts from reports and text
books, and tenders is judges advice Is TO
the makeup Of opinions. We do not con
cur in this criticism. He cites the cases OF
Crislip vs.. Cain, and Cooper vs. Railroad
Company as objec ionsble in these respects.
So Radford Va. Carwile is often cited as an
opinion of excessive length. The opinions OF
Judge Green in Crislp vs. Cain and Cooper
vs.. Railroad Company are monuments TO bus
labor. research, learning and ability that will
attest the able iurist long after his seat on
the bench shall know him no more. tits
hard that opinions costing so much toll,
eyineipg so much learning, should be thus
deprecated. Honor aud justice to whom
honor and Justice are due. Both OF
these opinions are Of inestimabls worth to
the State Just as they are. One Of them
discusses the matter Of fraud enter,
inc into contracts, q very in
tneate matter and treats of its effect
on contracts and the remedies agains. 1t;
and then applies it to that matter OF every
DAVIS occurrence, deficiency in quantity OF
land sold, and remedy therefore. On this
important subject decisions in Virginia
frcm early date down had been numerous,
confused and conflicting, and it was the
wise purpose of one court to review them
and settle the law for this State. for no one
until this decision could safely say what
Was the law on the subject. How could
this subject with 50 many cases, compiled
lions aud lines of difference be discussed in
short space2 No one not gifted with super
natural power to condense could cover the
6eld without elaboration. Had he at
tempted il, his effort to make plain would
have been muddier than that which 1t
sought to correct Several decisions, long
ago rendered, were di~sapproved. Propriety
and cleaIness required that the judge should
show wherein fault was found in the torme
decisions. We now see that We could not
dispense with this decision. In the Rsdford-
CarwiIe case Judge Green wisely
expends labor and length in
laying down the law on that
subject rarely arising in this State until our
Code, on which there were few decisions in
Virginia, and on which there was conflict
everywhere, the separate estate of marrlsd
women and its liability to debts. Uoder
our Code these matters arise every day.
This case and the authorities incorporated
in Judge Green's opinion, cover the whole
subject, and decide not only the points in
Judgment, but enable bench and bar to
handle the subject generally. These
opinions may be long, but when
close investigation and discrimination
ere the purpose, length of explanation is q
merit. Judge Woods opinion in the
Cooper Railroad case is able aud clear, and
by no means too long. 1t is objected to be-
cause it Incorporates extracts from authori-
ties. This feature is, in many instances,
valuable. Better that a Judge, instead OF
his own language, should sometimes adopt
the language Of an author Of recognized
authority or Of a decided case, because 1t
has been closely scanned, is generally apt,
and is authority. And in this State there
are few extensive libraries, few outside the
large towns, having any reports OF other
States, most Of them wanting many OF the
common text books; and these extracts
from other reports and text books to a ma
terial extent supply this want, and give the
Judges and lawyers law which is not other
wise accessible to them. Your correspond
ent SAYS, let the Judge make a briet state
ment Of what the law is and cite authorities,
ard let anyone disagreeiug hunt up the law.
Likely the Judges would readily consent to
this, if they lawfully could, but
how unsatisfactory would it be !!
Short, unsatisfactory propositions and
reference to books, without reasons. To do
this would disregard that provision of the
Constitution that When judgment or de.
cree is reversed or affirmed By the Supreme
Court of Appeals every point fairly arising
upon the. record O fthe case, shall be consid-
cred and decided; and the reasons therefor
shall be concisely stated in writing" and
the law providing for their publication in
the reports. How can you give these
reasons" without some length in the opin,
ions2 How much length must de-
pend on the number Of points
involved, their difficulty the number and
harmony or conflict Of the authorities bear
ing on the case, whether it involves priu-
Piles already settled or novel and compli'
/ Gated and needing to be settled, and other
considerations. The opinion of Judge
Woods in the railroad case involves the
question Of growing Importance to US of the
/ liability Of railroad companies for injury to
I employees arising from defective cars
or machinery, and how far the company is
liable where that injury results from mat
tention or neglect of duty BY fellow
employees. The authorities are conflicting,
the Judge reviews them and settles the law
for this State, and the quotations from other
books Incorporated in this opinion are
valuable, and many Of them not otherwise
accessible to our bars and circuit judges.
The truth is, that the opinions in our re-
ports are not Of excessive length. As a
rule, they are Unreasonable length, o tlonger
than the constitution and clear under
standing demand. The lengthy opinions are
few and only in cases Of novelty, or where
the law was before confused and doubtful,
or in other exceptional cases where length
is UNSUITABLE. Our Supreme Court com
pares well in all respects with those of other
States, and is disposing of large mass OF
business. Our twenty-iour volumes of re.
ports are in themselves almost a library OF
modern living Law. These volumes will i'm
prove on acquaintance; and, in the opinion
Of the girter, are no discredit to the State
or its Judiciary. The writer thinks it but
Justice to say this much in behalf Of the
Supreme Court. JCSrICE.
Weston, April 7th, 1885.
Barbour county comes to the front with