Eureka weekly sentinel. [volume] (Eureka, Nev.) 1887-1902, 1900-11-10
She 2Nceklg Sentinel.
TERMS FOR WEEKLY SENTINEL:
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS.

The Mining ana Oclentlhc Press
of recent date has lengthy article
on the manner in which the Supreme
Courts State and National
arrive at their decisions. II says:
"a recent decision of State Su-
preme Court in an important mining
case overrules the lower court and
gives justice by bare majority vote
of four to three; that is, four of the
Supreme Judges think one way and
three think the other way, some.
thing after the fashion of a public
vote. The three dissenting judges
set out at learned length their opin--
ions, arguing diametrically opposite
to the other four equally learned
Judges, and as it happens that four
think one way-one more than thinks
the other way-the scales of justice
incline that way.
"a verdict of four to three, which
would not be allowed in jury box
in Justices Court, is beneath the
dignity of high appellate
court and tends to undermine
its influence. No State is alone
in this degrading practice; near
ly every State in the Union has
similar experiences, and even the
Supreme Court Of the United States
the highest tribunal on earth and
the most respeeted-in some in
stances is itself guilty of what might
appear to be trifling with the grave
requirements of the nation, as in the
case of the income tax, where the
Court was divided, one Justice
changing his mind over night, re-
versing his opinion of the day before,
and thus giving bare majority to
the decision.
The Press goes on to show the
effect of such decisions on the public
mind, and argues that as the simple
decision is oil that the people are
interested in dissenting opinions
should be suppressed, and that ali
verdicts should be rendered as the
unanimous opinion of the Court, re-
gardless of the fact that perhaps a
large minority of the Justices might
be honestly opposed to the views of
the majority.
While no one will dispute that
unanimous verdiets are greatly to be
desired and would tend to impress
the people with perfect confidence
in the wisdom and integrity of the
Courts, the plan suggested by the
Mining and Scientific Press for ac-
complishing this result would seem
to be unwise. to say the least.
Supreme Court Judges are only
human, and only by impartial and
fair rulings can they hope to COM
mand the respect of the people.
From throttling the minority JUS
tices it is only step to forbidding
the public to question the decisions
of the Court. Again, the decisions
of even the Supreme Court of the
United States have proven that Its
meInbers hold political allegiance to
their parties above all other consid-
erations. At least the decisions rem
dered by that august body on the
income tax law and in the Tilden-
Hays election contest in 1876 would
seem to justify this conclusion, and
it can not be expected that the State
Supreme Courts are purer than "the
highest tribunal in the land"
The simple fact that a dissenting
Judge has the privilege OF disagree
ing with his associates, and publicly
stating his reasons therefor can not
fail to have wholesome effect upon
the preparing of Supreme Court de-
cisions, and it is sincerely to be
hoped that no attempt will be made
to abridge that right.