Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1911-07-28

of Augusta, Who Spoke in Behalf Of the
Supreme Bench.
his desk has disclosed 40 work an
finished. no duty unperformed.
Al nisi prius he stated the law to
the jury with absolute impartiality, in
clear and simple language without en-
creaching in the slightest degree upon
their province TO decide the issue of
fact, but with a singieness of purpose
to have the law correctly determined
and the truth discovered and declared.
He never forgot the distinction point
ed out by Chief Justice Marshall that
judicial power is never exercised for
the purpose OF giving effect to the viii
of the judge. but always for the pAr-
pose of giving effect to the will Of the
| law."
1t was his firm conviction that
Ipunetuality in the discharge of all
public and official duties, and correct
deportment and courteous manners in
the court room have a tendency to
facilitate the administration of the law
as well as to enhance the respect that
| is due To the court and he endeavored
with all reasonable vigilance and ap-
propriate methods to discountenance
any disregard of such commemorate
and dignified practices. The anchor
ating influence Of his discipline in that
behalf has been distinctly observable
But his judicial opinions as a mern-
Der of the law court, found in 80 vol
umes of the Maine Reports from the
10th to the 107th. constitute an endur-
ling monument to his great intellec-
tual gifts. the extent and variety of his
learning. his accurate knowledge of
the common law and his faculty of
adapting its flexible principles to new
enterprises. new developments and
new conditions in industrial and social
llife. NV attention was first attracted
to the excellence OF his work in he
law court when in the second year of
his service upon the bench, his opn-
ions in the important cases of Eames
Tvs Savage, and Andrews Y. King, APP
lpeared in the nth Maine Report.
The former involved a discussion of
constitutional law and it was held that
upon judgments against municipalities
execution may be issued against and
LEVIED upon the goods and chattels OF
their inhabitants and that this would
be due process of law" Andrews vs.
King was petition for certiorart tc
lquash the proceedings of the may o.
land aldermen of Portland in removing
the city marshal from office, I he
nature. powers and duties of specia
tribunals in such eases are July con
sidered and it was held that hearing
by the aldermen alone, the mayor he
ing required to sit on the hearing, was
not sufficient. even il no objection was
made by > the officer Warren vs.
Westbrook in the seth Maine, is q
leading case upon the exercise of M
equity powers of the court in the APP
! portionment of waters where there arr
TWO natural channels ina river caused
py an island. In the subsequen
opinions will be found luminous eX'
positions of constitutional law relat
ing TO inter state commerce, the police
power of the State and other questions
OF fundamental and reaching in
portahee. In the opinion of the JUS
tlces prepared by Chief Justice Emery
IN 1905 in answer to questions sub
.mltted by the Senate, this court, tru,
to the motto of the State, led all 9th.
ers, State and federal, in promulgat.
ing the benetfcent doctrine of the cen.
lservation of our natural resources il
the interests of the people 1t is there
! held to be within the constitutiona