The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-03-22

of such magnitude and transcendent i'm
portance-in point of fact. there are eight
or ten of these cases. every one OF which
has at core the same constitutional point,
but the details OF no two of which are ex-
actly alike-it is reasonable TO suppose
that more time will be consumed in the
preliminary stage of arriving at a dec1-
sion The justice who writes the first draft
or the decision has galley proofs OF IL
struck off for the convenience OF his as
sociates. When what the court officials
call the galley proof stage has thus been
completed, another conference OF the JUS
tices Is called and the. galley proof opinion
Is distributed. Discussion of the opinion IN
that form by the full bench may or may
not then ensue. 1t is probable that each
Juslce will carry this galley proof opinion
10 MS own study for more careful investi-
CATION than IL may be convenient TO give
II In conference. When the chief justice
learns that his associates are ready Tor an
otner conference he calls il. and then the
galley proof decision. as corrected and re-
Vlsed by each justice to suit his views, may
De multiplied into as many decisions as
there are members of the court. excepting.
or course, that the member who wrote the
original will make no changes in Ii. AT this
stage the really difficult work of the pro-
cess or forming the final opinion begins. II
there is to be a divided court, that fact
tnen becomes patent. and the completion OF
the task IS still further delayed by the ne
cesslty of the dissenters, or the minority,
going through identically the same pro-
cess OF designating some one of their num-
per 10 prepare a galley proof opinion for
AiNtSNASdllOI, COIICClloH anu ltNlSlOh
SO as TO meet to a nicely the views of each
or the minority. In the meantime the ma
Jorliy are laboring 10 produce from their
work OF revision on the original galley
proof opinion a deliverance that, in prin-
ciples and phraseology, accurately sets
forth the opinion of their number.
1t is a great thing for a country to have
for its highest court of appeal a body of
learned men who take so much time and
exercise so much care. labor and patience
to make their decisions such as will stand
the test of professional criticism and of
time and posterity. In the present case the
country would have accepted the decision
OF the court as a finality if it had been
rendered a week after the suits were SUBJ
mitted on briefs and arguments. but the
elaboration of the court will give still
greater weight to it's decision. a court that
moved in an atmosphere of popular clamor
or political expediency would not exercise
such elaboration. Happily, the character
and traditions of the Supreme Court of the
United States will not allow it. to do other
wise. 1t does not even allow itself to be
hurried by the fact that the shaping of the
entire Colonial policy of the government.
to use an ill-fitting phrase, may depend
upon its decision. Without regard to COL
lateral questions it simply takes all the
time necessary to digest and assimilate
the submitted and to formulate.
each member of the court for himself, and
a majority for the court, opinions that are
TO shape the policy of the Nation for all
future time. The Nation is fortunate in
having a Supreme Court of such delibera-
ton.