The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1899-05-21
NOTES OF LEGAL EVENTS.

litigation OF considerable importance relating
to the election OF Justices Of the Supreme Court
In the Second judicial district OF this state In
1896. Judge Calvin +. Pratt OF Brooklyn died
on Aug. 3. 1896. The general election took
place on the Sd Of November following. Tho
Constitution provides that whore a vacancy
shall occur by death In the office OF Supreme
Court Justice. the came shall be filed for a
full term at the next general election happen
ing not less than three months after such q
vacancy occurs. The election authorities de-
termined that the election to he held on Nov.
3. = would not be less than three months
after Judge Pratt's death. aud consequently
arranged TO have his successor then chosen.
Electors were therefore invited to vote for
four Justices Of the Supreme Court at that
election. instead OF only three. as would have
been the case II a successor to Judge Pratt
could not be elected until the following year.
Messrs. Goodrich. Maddox. Garretson and
Hirschberg were the successful candidates.
In 1897. however. n gentleman named Cole
ridge A. Hart. contending that only three Su-
preme Court Justices should have been elected
In 1SB. and that the.s had been no valid
election OF any to Ill the vacancy caused by
Judge Pratt's death. received five votes For
Justice of the Supreme Court to fill vacancy In
place of Calvin l.. Pratt. deceased lie ap-
Piled for a writ OF mandamus to com pei the
State Board OF Canvassers to declare him elect
ed by these votes. but was unsuccessful in the
Supreme Court and has appealed to the Court
OF Appeals. where the case was recently ar
gued In his behalf by Mr.. David b. Hill and in
bshalf OF the respondents by Mr.. Elihu Root.
Mr.. George II. Williams. formerly q Senator
from Oregon and Attorney-General OF the
United States. has contributed to the Yale Lao
Journal som frank and entertaining remi-
niscences of the Supreme Court at Washington.
as he knew 1t during President Grants Adj
ministration. or Mr.. Justice Clifford he says
that he was the impersonation OF the highest
style OF judicial decorum and propriety and 80
proud Of his official position that the uppermost
thought in his mind seemed to be. Il am a
Judge OF the Supreme Court OF tho United
Statas and don't you forget it," Judge Clifford
was noted for his dislike for the articles "a"
and AN and the" and SO fa- as possible he
avoided using them in his opinions. An ex-
ample OF his style in this respect may be
found in Christmas vs.. Russell 70 Wallace's
Reports. 290l. or Mr.. Justice Nelson Mr..
Williams says that his manners were those
that a cavalier Of the olden time may be sup
posed to have had. and that as a lady's escort
he was without a peer in the official circles OF
Washington" As to Ward Hunt. he recalls
Judge Blacks characterization OF that Justice
as "a very !ady-like parsonage" Mr.. Will
liams thinks that the late Mr.. Justice Bradley
Of New Jersey was the most scientific mar
who ever sat on the bench Of the Supreme
Court, and tells us that he found him one even
ing engaged as a recreation in calculating the
transit Of Venus!
In connection with the recent decision OF
the Court Of Appeals in the Fielding case. re-
versing a conviction on account OF what were
laIJ to ha In, rppa rap,arEa hy tina Diafript
Attorney in his argument to the jury. we may
call attention to a-.reversal by the Appellate
Division Of the Supreme Court sitting at
Rochester, because tho trial Judge told the
defendant to answer the question which had
been put to him "and stop clubbing" This
was in the County Court Of Livingston county
in a prosecution for perjury. Mr.. Justice
Spring, writing for the Appellate Division. says
that the expression thus used by the trial
Judge-was tantamount to q declaration OF a
belief on his part that the witness sought to
evade telling the: truth. 1t was particularly
Injurious to a defendant who was being tried
upon an indictment for perjury. and the in
Jury is held not to have been cured By subse-
quent instructions to the Jury to determine
the facts for themselves irrespective OF the
opinion Of the Court. tSee People VS.. Hill. SO
n. Y. Supplement. 1927
A pretty radical decision In the law OF negli-
gence has been made by the Supreme Court
OF North Carolina in a case where a brakeman
employed upon the Southern Railway was in
iured while attempting to couple cara upon
which there were skeleton drauheads Of I'M
equal height instead Of automatic couplers.
The court holds that the failure Of a railroad
company to equip its freight cars with modern
self-coupling devices is negligence per SCI
and renders the corporation liable to an en-
ployeo injured while coupling cars by hand.
whether the employee was negligent In the
manner of making the coupling or not. Mr..
Justice Clark says that the subject Is one OF
transcundant importance. and quotes from
the report OF the Interstate Com
mission statistics which show that in the year
ending June 80. 1897. PA persons wore killed
and 6.2S3 wounded in coupling or uncouplinG
cars on railroads engaged in Interstate COM
merce In this country.
In asserting the legal obligation OF railroad
companies to employ automatic couplers on
their freight cars and passenger cars alike.
the Supreme Court Of North Carolina refers
to the argument OF counsel that a noble Eng
lish lord. who was a railroad manager had
changed his party because the one to which
he had belonged favored legislation to compel
the adoption OF the automatic system Of
coupling cars on railways in England. This
sim ply shows" says the Court. that ono such
manager. at least. possesses a lordly disre-
gard for the thousands Of deaths and injuries
OF employees yea-lv caused by the lack OF
safety appliances; and 1t may be there are
others who entertain sentiments OF higher
allegiance to the net earnings OF the syndi-
Gates that employ them than to those great
principles which every political party pro-
fesses to advocate as being for the best inter-