The morning call., 1894-10-11
MISSING, BUT FOUND AGAIN.
Discovered Lying on the Desk of
Secretary.
THE SUPREME COURT METHODS.
Attorney Jennings Still Says That
the Document Strayed to Fourth
and Townsend Streets.

That the routine of the clerks Office of
the Supreme Court Is sadly defective there
is no doubt. but according to the explana-
ton given by the officials in charge in re-
gard to the alleged Disappearance of the
opinion in the case of DIR. w. II. Robinson
VS.. the Southern Pacific Company, the
fault lies with the loose system ana not
wholly with the clerk and his deputies.
George A. McCalvey was in charge of the
office when G. III. Jennings, the attorney,
called for the original decision In the case
mentioned, aud he declares that the docu-
ment was afterward found on the desk of
Secretary Finklsr in another apartment.
He further alleges that after the departure
of Jennings from the office aud immed-
ately upon the finding OF the missing Opln-
ion a telephone message was sent TO Attor-
ney Knox. friend of Jennings, who III
turn notified the latter
Upon investigation it appears that the
Supreme Court has drawn up rules from
time t. time, which. to say the least, fall
short of perfectlng the system Of filing in
the clerks Office. In some instances there
are original opinions accompanied by
copies, but more often it happens that the
official stenographer copies the original
notes of the Justices and fails 10 make any
copies whatever. The law allows the
clerk to hold the decision for thirty days,
but almost invariably the official prlh tor
puts in an appearance soon alter filing,
and proceeds to include the document in
the California Reports. supposed TO be
a correct record of the proceedings of the
Supreme Court. The original document is
then sent TO Sacramento. where it is placed
Al nd in FOR
to come.
Aside from the printed California Re-
ports there is absolutely nothing in the
clerks office to show what action has been
taken in any particular case except in the
rare instances referred to, when copies are
made. And Furthermore, it is we'll
known fact tlat the justices have fire.
euentIy been known to slightly change or
correct their original opinions after the
same have been returned from the hands
of the official printer. 1t will be seen
therefore that the original copy in the
vault at Sacramento and the official report
in the California Reports are often ct
variance aud confusion is the natural re-
suit.
In the case OF Robinson VS.. the Southern
Pacific Company, the original when called
for by Attorney Jennings was missing
from the Office, ana no trace could be
found of it for several hours. 1t was not
in its customary place among the days
decisions. The secretary supposed it was
i'm the hands of the printers, and Deputy
McCalvey had no definite idea where it
was.
Having had some previous experience
W 18th the Southern Pacific Company's meth
DDS. Attorney Jennings naturally con-
cluded that the missing document was
being carefully perused at Fourth and
Townsend streets. 1t was ureartaed later
on the desk oil Secretary FnkIer, who is
now IN Los Angeles attending term of
court, but just how it ever arrived in the
office of that gentleman will probably never
be known.
Attorney Jennings, when informed of
the discovery OF the opinion, sml ati audi
bly, aud maintained that sufficient time had
elapsed between the hour he had imputed
for the opinion and the time of its de
covery to permit tho law department of
the Southern Pacific Company to return it
to its compartment in the Supreme Court
clerks office.
Inquiry at Fourth and Townsend re-
vealed nothing. They had not seen the
document. except on the day of its filing,
and knew nothing OF its whereabouts dur
ing the afternoon of Monday. The opinion
is now on file in the clerks office, slightly
disfgured, but fostered and guarded by
the clerks in charge.