The Fairmont West Virginian. (Fairmont, W. Va.) 1904-1914, 1912-04-27

The candidacy'or Judge George Poi
fenbarger of the Supreme Court Of
Appeals for reelection, subject to the
action OF tho Republican State convcn-
ton, to be held at Huntington, is a
subject of deep and general interest
His judicial work is regarded as at
least tho equal the best that has
ever been done III that Court, and as
far more than merely satisfactory
At the date OF his election; he was
regarded rs a very young man to be
honorcd by eleCtionf3to the bench of
the Supreme Court. Since then, the
nomination aud election Of Young men
seems 10 have become. the rule. 0w-
ing to Judge Poffenbargcrs youth and
brief experience asa lawyer, when
nominated and electedi in 1870, those
who did not know him well, doubted
his ability satisfactorily to discharge
| the duties Of his high position; but his
first opinions quickly .allayed all fear
and banisbed all doubts. They bore
on their faces proof Of industry, pa
tient careful, skllrul and thorough re-
search, unusually strong analytical
and dlscriminative powers and rare
| judicial temperament and methods, CIV
ing both promise and assurance OF a
highly successful judicial career, all
OF which has been fully realized. His
industry, application and ability have
been subjects Of increasingly wide
and favorable comment from that time
until the present.
His opinions impress the reader by
the excellence Of their literary style
their clearness and comprehensive
ness and the logic and philosophy IL
which they abound. Presidents are
literally cited, but always supplement-
cd b yclear statements Of legal prin'
c:ples and lorccful reasoning. sold
firm and elevated in tone and spirit
they carry conviction OF sincerity and
mastery OF his subject. In the runner
Gus election cases in which he. has
written opinions, no trace of political
leaning can be found, and yet he Is
known everywhere TO be very R'alld
consistent 'iu his political bcliefBaltl
affiliations. ".'t!p'Hf
His absolute freedom from corpo
rate or Interests" subserviency OF
bias is demonstrated by -hisRattitude
In Griffin VS.. Fairmont Coal Co., il
which he endeavored to hold the com
pauy liable for damage done to n Land
owners surface. by removal of thu
pillars in mining under Il lease; II
Chesapeake and Ohio Ry. Co. VS.
Dcepwater Ry. Co., in which the for
mcr was disallowed, upon strict lega
principles, claim for cost of con
struCting tunnel on the right OF way
of the latter, amounting To- nearly
$1OO,0OO.O0, and he suggested al prihci
: plc under which property owners ma!
appeal in condemnation suits befor
their property has been actually tax
ell. contrary TO former holdings oil tn
court; in Conley, attorney General, VI
Chesapeake and Ohio Ry Co., unde
the "Two Gent Rate" law, in wiltcI
be opposed allowance of an appeal t
, the U. S. Supreme Court; in Comic
VS.. Coal and Coke Ry. Co., in whic
he wrote the opinion sustaining tn
validity of the 1.-TWO Cent Rate law
} and in state VS., Graphical, in which h
! wrote the opinion, denying the bank
! right to deduct from their capital, SUI
! plus and undivided profits, the vall
Of stocks held by them in other co
porations, in the ascertainmcnt oil til
: values of their assets for purposes {
taxation. There are only few OF tn
more striking demonstrations OF tn
y fact. Many others can be found.
Some OF the more notable cases
. which he has delivered opinions al
@ the great King Lapd' case, State V
q West Branch LII mber Co., involvin
the relation between the State an
purchasers OF land at sherffs' sale
for non.payment of taxes, and Comic
VS.. Coal and Coke Railway Co. !
q yoIytng the validity Of the Two 3eni
railroad rate law. Tho King case. 5el