The St. Louis Republic. [volume] (St. Louis, Mo.) 1888-1919, 1901-07-18
Judge Peers of Warrenton De.
,clares Interview on Marshall
Opinion Unprofessional.
BAD BREACH OF ETIQUETTE.
Failure to Write a Dissenting Opin-
ion Puts His Personal State.
ments in u Discredit-
able Light

Judge Charles E. Peers of Warreuton,
No., who also has an Office in the Vain
wright building. arrived in st. Louis yes
terday. after an absence of several days.
Judge Peers is warm personal friend Of
Judge Marshall of the Missouri Supreme
Court. and he was much displeased with the
recent newspaper criticism by Judge Rob-
fnson Of Judge Marshalrs election contest
decision. Speaking of Judge Marshall yes
terday. Judge Peers said:
Il have known him for many years. and
esteem him as one of the ablest and most
trustworthy members Of the judiciary Of
the State. He is honorable. conscientious,
upright and resolute, and his decisions rank
high in the legal profession"
What do you think Of Judge Robinson's
interview. published in a st. Louis paper,
criticising Judge Marshalls election dect-
sione"
Il think 1t is exceedingly unbecoming in
any member of the Supreme Court to crtti-
else his associates off the bench and through
the public press. Aside from the ethics OF
the profession and the law, it was ill-man-
nered to say the least. He could have writ
ten dissenting opinion, thus eniightentng
the people rs to his views OF the case anu
the law. by which. also. he could have con.
formed to the rules Of professional conduct
and relieved his evidently overcharged par.
tisan mind. II he has taken advantage OF
the opportunity open to him. the legal pro,
fesSion OF the State has not yet discovered
1t. His criticism was uncalled for and very
tn-advised, since he can only .critlctse. II
he were the big and brainy man he would
have himself pass for, ne would nave T TsMe
distinguished himself. and his words or Wis
dom would have had the dignity OF utter
ance from the bench, instead OF being her-
aided through a partisan newspaper.
"Judge ROOinSOn'S nomination and eleC.
ton were accidents. II the Republican
party had for a moment imagined that q
Republican candidate could have been elect
ed, man Of recognized ability. and one
having State reputation. such as Rom
bauer. Klein or Rozier Of st. Louis; Brew
are of st. Charles, Brewster of st: Joseph,
Williams of Moniteau, or Gray OF Jasper
would have been put forward.
Judge Marshall, in his opinion In the
election case, holds to principle that ne
has. to my certain knowledge. adsocate !,
would not have been concurred in by the
other members Of the court who did con-
cur in 1t. In criticising that opinion as he
has done. Judge Robinson is losing sight OF
the dignity Of the office he occupies in
his endeayor to make a little cheap capital
for his party in this State. II he Is dis
satisfied with his 4 h sannoa draw
the salary paid to him by the people OF the
State and be content to write an occasional
opinion, I've no doubt that he would have
fession Of the Slate and Of ali Of his asso-
ciates on the bench to the sending Of his
resignation to the Governor. II he should
prefer to serve out his accidental term OF
confine his discussions to the bench. Ad3ust-
ment to his environment and realization
of the dignity of his position. together with
Conservatism and bipartisan judgment;
would be beneficial to Judge hooinsoh'
think"