The Asheville citizen. [volume] (Asheville, N.C.) 1885-1889, 1888-01-03

- II 1lNIsb.
VS. clip the following from our
Stale exchanges relative to the re-
cent article from Judge J. H. Merri-
mon, giving the reasons for his de-
cision in the GierEch case, tried at
July term of Wake Court:
From the Goldsboro argus
Judge Jas. II, Merrimon has Just
recently filed an opinion in the case
of State VS. Giersch, in which the
Supreme Court had but recently
filed an opinion over ruling him in
the Court below. The Supreme
Court in its opinion, which was filed
oy J14:n Augustus S. Merrimon,
was hardly respectful in its allu-
sions tn the opinion of the learned
judge h-.ow. Judge James Il Mor-
rimon's opinion was published in
the Ashcyil:e CITIZEN and is copied
in part in the NeUs and Observer.
The bar Of tn" State we think very
generally thought that the Supreme
Conrt would tustain Judge James
II. Mecrimon, hence we we're no lit
tie surprised at the sighting man
ner in which lis ruling was com,
nentcd on hy the Suprem, Court"
From the Raleigh Chronicle:
"T.o weeks ago we published he
decision of the Supreme Court, de-
iivered by Justice A. S Merrimcn,
in the Gier<ch case That decision
settled the law in North Carolina tc
be tina; bscr and wire are included
in the term ''spirituoCs liquors" 1t
will be remembered that Judge Jas.
II. Merrimon held that ''spirltuous
liquors" did not include beer and
wine. The Supreme Court over
ruled him, AMI he published III the
Aaheville CITIZEN his opinion, which
appears to have been prepared when
the case was tried before him in
July. It would never do for a Su-
prene Court Judge to review Su-
preme Court, and over-rule their
decision, by saying that such was
his purpose. Ii is regarded IS
different thing, h" some, 10 publish
an opinion, combating the view "f
the Supreme Court, which had not
been published previously to the
rendering OF the decision of the
highest cour: At any rate this il
what Judge James H. Mer1iiron
does 1t is an unu>4aI p5occ DUE
and will suffice, the Superior Court
Judge TO criticism, hut i,c Is bold
and fearless au,i cares less for criti-
ciSm tjtar my o'hcr public man We
know Additional and incidental
int""c.t j. added to the discussion
AMI d;Gery nce oi opinion by reason
ot ,Ge <; Chat the two Judges are
troi!.,r;. fi,- Chronicle published
the d,ci>ion Of ;he Supreme Court,
and, nr!ieving Jhat all sides are en-
ut.sd ia nearing, we to-day pre-,
seat the opinion Of Judge Jas. H.
Merrimon. 1t will oe found inter
estirg, clear, s!ro"E "nd able.
From the W!itais:gtoa MrsScager ::
Judge Msrrimon's opinion in
the GieTsch case has excited much
c II1 mrut and 2 fresh sensation is
now c,usfd by :. publication III the
AshsviIle CITIZEN by Judge Marri
mon making 4 severe attack upon
Justice MerrimOn's decision in the
case"
From the Raleigh correspondent
OF the Petersburg L,der Appeal,
The sensation of yesterday Has
the appearance of Il very le gthy
review Of the recent decision OF the
supreme court in the Gi1r>a.r oasc,
writlsu by Judge james II. Merria
mon ii ths superior court, jeiore
whom the case was tried III Wake
county last Juiy, ana wi.o rem Gcrcd
the verdict in favor Of the county
commissioners TO issue licenses to
sell wine and beer, h2idiug such
no! TO be spurious liquors within
the meaning Of the legislative cn
act,nent. The rev Jew is very Sc
we're attack upon the supreme court
and the writer cites numerous au-
tEorties and acts in support 81 his
position. The !act that Ju--
tice Merrimnn, OF the ST.
preme Court. who lendeled
the recent opinion, is the hrotl-
er of the judge whose opinion IS re-
yersed and who 50 severely c-ltl>
cises the action of the higher court,
adds to the general comment of the
public. Never before IN the history
of North Carolina has the highest
legal tribunal been the subject Of
such Il bitter excoriatiOn at the
hands of \ subordinate Judge, and
public opinion has been worked up
here to fever heat. 10 the un-
preiudiccd mind thc cev;.n il a
powerful arraigm!ufrt Of tie etl-
prems court and il nppe.rs to be
backed up hy sucn proof and
points of law ;.s to render it almost
irresistible in pnlit o: conviction
1t clearly demonstrates that the
foreshadowiDg npiGi''O, rep&ered by
the chief justice sometime since,
upon the basis OF which the license
to Giersch WAS issued, is totally at
variance with the recent one. After
a full discussion of the case, with
ample authorities quoted, the re-
view closes with the following strict.
ures 1T would be monstrous, even
in case of doubt, t, construe a
mans money out of his pocket or
him into iail when the case is