Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1888-12-12
In the U. s. Supreme Court.


The Evening Wisconsin, instead of pub
fishing Mr.. Halls letter as to Walter
Williams fictitious account of what oc-
Cured upon the argument of our bond
suit before the United States Supreme
Court, merely states two of its prominent
points. At our request Mr.. Hall consents
to our publication of the whole letter:
WATERFOWL, Wis, Dec. 5, '88.
Editors of EUening Wisconsin:-
DEAR SIRs:-Your paper of the Ord
inst, in an article headed, "He Gained
His Point-A Wisconsin Lawyer expert
ence Before the United States Supreme
Court" made up mainly of an extract
from Walter Williams letter in last Sun
days Chicago Tribune, contains what
purports to be the description OF a scene
in the United States Supreme Court at
Washington, which never existed. Mr..
Williams must have obtained his assumed
facts secondhand, or else got himself
sadly mixed up in the matter. The slight
and only foundation for the account, con-
trary to your suggestion. has no relation
to me, nor to CharlesE Monroe, as stated,
but relates solely to Col. Geo. w. Bird,
my esteemed and able associate, in all our
railroad bond litigation.
At the commencement of the argument
Of the case of Metcalf vs.. the City of Wa
tertown, Col. Bird moved to dismiss the
writ of error for want of jurisdiction, on
the ground that the citizenship of plain
tiff's assignors was not alleged in his orr
ginal complaint. Justice Miller then
suggested that he had no right to make
the motion as he could not have taken
any exceptions in the court below, but
Justice Gray dissented from this view and
sent for, and obtained books apparently
to sustain his position The rest of Mr..
Williams account as to what followed is
a mere myth, for the chief justice then
interposed and said that the usual and
proper course was for US to wait till we
reached our side of the case, when we
could argue every question including that
OF Jurisdiction, to which Mr.. Monroe would
have opportunity to reply in his final ar
gument. Which order of procedure was
then at once adopted and the arguments
followed without unusual incident 70 the
close the court manifesting the greatest
interest in the questions the case involv-
ed, and the justices, according to their
usual custom, sending for books and con-
sulting authorities as the argument pro-
crossed.
| have never noticed any indication
that any one of the justices of that court
was inclined to worry young lawyers
With twelve hundred or more cases on
its calendar the United States supreme
court, has to adapt the NEST efficient sys-
tenn of rapidly disposing of them. Their
plan evidently is, to pursue such course
in arriving at the merits, as will ordinar-
ily enable them to make their decision at
the enc of the four hours arguments al
lowed to each case. Hence it is not
usually a place for fine speeches. The
work of the court is too direct and earnest
for that. What they want are the facts
and the law. And when any justice of
the court is is in doubt of either he usual
~ questions the attorneys. A more per-
feet system of accurately disposing of
judicial questions have never known.
No attorney, who has studied bis case till
he has perfect mastery of it, need fear to
appear before that court. Others had
better keep away.
write this letter because said extract
does gross injustice to Justice Miller, one
of the oldest and ablest judges of the
court; and because you make me, in place
of Mr.. Monroe, the hero of scene which
never occurred; and also, because have
neither the ability, nor the ambition to
take down the whole supreme court OF the
United States, nor any one of its judges.
Truly Yours,
DANIEL HALL.