The daily morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven, Conn.) 1894-1907, 1900-10-13

1IBlSSS pm ctStps NV JduSC CIV % 'A'NN
more lofty idea of his office, or upheld
| 1t with a flrmer hand. Only two Amer
leans are better entitled to the graft
tude of our people-George Washing
ton and Abraham Lincoln. Marshall
judicial temperament was such that 1t
was not possible for him to see any
question simply on it's technical side.
He had, in It's fullest measure, that
large discourse" of which Shakespeare
speaks, Cooking before and after"
Roger B. fancy, who succeeded Mar
shall, was a man eminenty fitted for
that exalted position. Learned, able,
patient honest, he filled the ideal of a
great Judge But, like Marshall, he
had a temperament; like Marshall, he
belonged to a school. Strict construc-
ton was as dear to him as 1t was odi-
GUS to his predecessor. After referring
with regret to the bred Scott case the
speaker said: Let us be just. Judge
fancy was sustained by the entire
court, save two, Mclean and Curtis,
1t matters little now who was right and
who was wrong for the issue went to a
higher court and was settled forever.
In the license cases Judge fancy sus-
tanned the reserved powers Of the states
in their proper field of police regulation.
In Charles River Bridge VS. Warren
Bridge, he applied his lifelong princl-
pie of strict construction to grants OF
public franchises to private corpora
lions, ana in so doing established, as
the permanent doctrine of the supreme
court, the ancient rule of the common
law, that all public grants must be
strictly construed against the grantee.
AS chief justice it came to him in the
order of duty to administer the oath OF
Office to Abraham Lincoln as president
of the United States. The venerable
chief justice, bowed with the weight OF
years and the sad feeling that new
and stormy period was opening before
the country, could only perform the
duty of his office, and silently repress
his gloomy forebodings The new pres
ident, filled with a solemn sense OF the
future, appealed to all his countrymen,
north and south, in words which Will
, live forever. I'VE are not enemies, but
friends; we must not be enemies II
passion may have strained, it must not
break our bonds of affection" This
sad and tender language did not con-
I ceal, and was not intended to conceal
the inflexible purpose of the man. lie
had already said in that same inau-
gural and for four weary years he
abided by TT hold that, in contem-
plation of universal law and of the con-
stitution, the union of these states Is
perpetual" 1t is not too much to say
that in that moment, the constitution
took a distinct forward step, and the
voice of John Marshall spoke again
The three great amendments that fol-
lowed the war, and which made free
dom and equality organic in our law,
were the logical and irresistible conclu-
sion of that great struggle. The four
tenth amendment is the great anchor
age for the rights which essentially be-
longto citizenship in a free government.
BY the fifth amendment the people had
protected their rights against arbitrary
entertainments by the general govern
ment; while the fourteenth amend
ment they in like manner protected
them against the arbitrary exercise of
power by states When these guaran-
ties We're thus made uniform In respect
to both national and state legislation,
the constitution took forward step;
and when, in 1856 the supreme court
decided that these guarantees extended
to every person, natural or artificial
another great advance was made.
The large scope of the fourteenth
amendment, maintained in the dissent
ing opinions of Justices Field, Bradley
and Swayne, and concurred In by Chief
Justice Chase, in the slaughterhouse
cases. has since become the estab-
lished view of the court in numerous
decisions. In none of them, probably
has the doctrine now accepted by the
courts been more convincingly ex-
pressed than by Justice Harlan in the
great case Of Smyth against Ames in
which the court held that a railroad
corporation Is a person within this
metning of the fourteenth amendment
declaring that no state shall deprive
any person of property without due
process of law, nor deny to any person
within its jurisdiction the equal pro-
lection of the laws; that statutes arbi-
trarily fixing railway rates which will
not admit of the carrier earning just
compensation are unconstitutional; and
that the validity of such atues Is Ill
Ll1ndtely IlihLleT lOI JullClHl lliIull "
In the complex workings of modern
civilization, large fortunes have been
rapidly accumulated, and great wealth
has been conferred in few hands Peo-
pile naturally ask: Would just order
of social and economic relations permit
this to happen? Whatever the true
answer may be to this inquiry, no one
can doubt that the well-being of our
people depends upon maintaining sa-
credly the equal rights guaranteed by
the fifth and fourteenth amendment to
rich and poor alike. Property, because
it is most easy of attack, Is most fire.
quently attacked. This is no new illus
tration of human nature, but is part
of the phenomena of all history.
In English history, as in our own,
most of the great questions which
mark the progress of legal rights have
grown out Of small property disputes.
Men have invariably been more ready
to engage in litigation over concrete
questions than to go to law about alb
stract principles. 1t was such q suit
that gave us the great announcement
upon the nature of our government
1.-THE constitution, in all it's provisions
looks" said Chief Justice Chase, "to an
indestructible union, composed of indie
structible states"