Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1886-08-10


examination of witnesses. He called upon
JUDGE HEYDENFELT,
Who in response to questions, said; The general
opinion of the bar, and my own opinion, is that
the present Supreme Court is weak one. The
bar has always regarded Morrison as a weak
Judge and particularly so since his affiiction.
The business of the Court is about three years
behind now. 1t takes from two to three years
after n case is placed upon the calendar TO reach
II. He had a conversation with Sharpsteln sat
urday regarding the business of the Court.
He said it was still accommodating, and that
the Commission cid not aid in diminish
ing the business before them. 1t struck
witness that if something was not done, and
that sooDi the business would become blocked
in the future and warrant a revolution. be
thought seven Judges Of good legal ability, with
the business properly divided, ought 10 be able
TO handle it. Witness was on the Supreme
Bench five years. When there were but three
Judges upon the bench they handled 500 cases a
year, and in those days it was a very rare thing
for a case TO go over u term. They disposed of
many cases from the bench without writing
elaborate opinions. He did not believe in
lengthy opinions. He never wrote but one
lengthy opinion and that YVES in a case where
he dissented. The Commissioners work had to
be all gone over by the Judges; it
was really a trying Of the case over
again. and he saw very little accomplished
by this double work. He was in favor of a
complete and thorough reorganization of the
Court. The system was one of the worst i'm
aginable. The same cases were tried in depart
lnent.t lueu III Dduh, naO 10 De nedrC INlce,
thus taking up much valuable time. He thought
the writing of dissenting opinions was all right.
The Judges should have that right in order to
place themselves upon record. Very often the
dissenting opinion is regarded as the best
authority, and is quoted as such by other
Courts as being better law than the deciding
opinion.
on cross-examination by Judge Miner, wit
ness said he knew nothing of the mental or
physical condition of either of the Judges, ex-
cept by hearsay. The Court as whole is q
weak Court.
- p sroSEY
said, from conversations with members of the
bar he had come to the opinion that neither of
the Judges had been able TO do efficient service
for 9 year past He had no social acquaintance
with either of them knew them only in pro-
fessional way.
Terry asked witness if he had not heard that
the other Judges upon the bench had not con-
teuplated cohiiug before the Legislature and
asking the removal of Judges Morrison and
Sharpstein for incompetency.
Judge Miner objected TO the question, saying
that would bring the other five Judges before
the committee.
Judge TeTTy-Yes, sir, that is what it viii do,
and why not bring them
The objection was Overru!ed and witness in
strIcted 10 answer the question.
Witness replied that he had been told so by q
member of the bar, who obtained the informa-
ton from one of the Judges, but refused to give
his authority.
A. L. RHODES,
Who served sixteen years upon the Supreme
Bench was asked if he had not stated that
Judge Morrison aud Judge Sharpstein should
resign from the bench. After considerable dis
eussion between the witness and Judge Terry as