The Caucasian. (Clinton, N.C.) 188?-1913, 1901-03-28
White was deprived Of a vested

White was deprived Of a vested
right.
He was then questioned on the
White case and said that the case
was advanced because State cases
were usually when the public inter
est was involved.
The Supreme Court adjourned in
June and witness was asked why
it WAS in session 50 long. Judge
Douglas replied in part:
81 was largely responsible for that,
L think. My health had not been
good and was kept very busy with
some important cases. The decision
in the case of Debnam Vi. the Tele-
phone Company, involving the con-
stitutionality Of the Craig act, was
given me to write. The court was
left open 80 that / could file these
opinions, Judges Clark and Mont
gomery being here.
He said he knew nothing Of the
White case except as it came up on
agreed suit. The case was argued
and majority Of the court held
that he was entitled to his manda-
mus. He had not met White until
a few days ago.
Continuing, he said that after the
court left and went home the next
he heard of it was when Mr.. Harris
came into court and complained that
he could not get the money. Judge
Douglas, when questioned, gave
about the same description of the
incident In the court room when
Col. Kenan asked for instructions.
Col. Kenan wanted the court to in
struct him to issue the writ, which
the court declined to do then as
there was nothing before the court
He told Col. Kenan at the Var
borough that there was nothing be-
fore the court to act on, but if he
wished to have full protection then
he might refuse to issue the manda-
mus and have notice served on him
to show cause why he had not is
sued it. Col. Kenan did not wish
to do this as it would put him in the
attitude of antagonizing the court.
At Col. Kenan's request for his pri
vate opinion he wrote a note which
he then read. This note said he had
no right to advise him as an in
dividual or as judge, no matter
being before the court, but he
thought that being the object of the
suit, he thought White was entitled
to the writ.
In the course of his testimony
Judge Douglas said that he never
saw the writ before it was issued;
knew nothing about it being served.
The witness said that he under
stood that Judge Clark wanted his
order to the clerk spread upon the
minutes, and the dissenting opinion
published in the next volume of Re.
ports succeeding the volume contain
ing the other opinions in the case.
Witness then stated what he con.
ceived and understood the purpose
and value Of dissenting opinions to
be, and said that he had known dis.
senting opinions filled, of course, al
the same time other opinions are) tC
be adopted as the deciding opinion
of the court, the majority adopting
it instead of the contrary one pre-
pared before the dissent was read by
v other judges, etc.
After case had been decided and
= gone off the docket, there is moth
. ing to "dissent' about.
- 81 knew no reason why I should
vote to allow another case to be flee
at the time this dissenting opinion
- of Judge Clark was offered.'
l The paper which Judge Dougla
Z called the ''order" of Judge Clarl
was that in which he (Clark) order
ed Clerk Kenan not to issue the wri
9 of mandamus, and stating that the
court had never ordered him t,
issue it, etc.
The corrections in Judge Clark's
opinion were not made in my pres
ence, and I knew nothing about th'
9 erasures until the time of the legis
. = lative committee meeting. I tolt
W Judge Clark that his opinion coult
60 In the Reports only as his 'obitu
. . ary notice. and that he (the witness
u would not object to that. It wa
9 said pleasantly, and caused no il
feeling that [ am aware of. / re
> gard the absolute independence o
70 " the judiciary as absolutely necessar.
). to the proper performance of the du
~ ties. have never intended to den,
=. any member of the court any righ
~ or privilege due him, and I do NO
70 70 think have ever sought or tried Q
intended to bring the Legislature o
- North Carolina into disrepute. O.
u the contrary, I have tried to uphol
:, its rights as coordinate branch c
A' the State government. was calle
upon to pass upon the constitution
ality of them, have l done so, an
ce even then 1 have studiously endea,
n ored to eliminate only the unconst
tutional portions of such acts, an
In to leave all in effect that could
"a, left in force"
ne Green VS.. Owen u25 N. c., 221
On was cited by the witness to prov
rn the above statement, the opinion i
Y, that case being written by him.
st ''1t was my desire to give flu
to faith and credit to the acts Of tt
Legislature and uphold them so ia
,e- as / could in obeyance Of my oath
er Office.
81 have never been Influenced
ell any political or party consideration
III in rendering any decision I hay
re ever made since I have been on tt