The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1914-11-08
NOVEL POTTS OF THE LAW.

In Post VS.. UnitN 'ates, before the
United States Circuit curt OF Appeals,
Fifth Circuit. which was a Christian Sci
ence case, the trial Judge directed tho
Jury Co disregard certain evidence because
1t was contrary TO the well esta blished
laws OF nature" The appellate court re-
jected this ruling. and the opinion OF
Judge Shelby said
when a question OF fact Ia tested. al
though It may involve the existence OF a
power not generally recognized. evidence
bearing on the question must be con-id-
cred as In other cases Science has not
yet drawn, and probably never Will draw,
q continuous and permanent line between
the possible and impossible, the movable
and unknowable. such line may appear
to he drawn In one decade. but It il re-
moved In the next, and encroaches on
what was the domain Of the Impossible
and unknowable. Advance In the use of
electricity, AMI experiments in telepathy
hypnotism and clairNoyance warn us
against dogmatism. The experience OF
the judiciary. as shown by history should
teach tolerance and humility. when We re-
call that the bench once accounted for
familiar physical and mental conditions
10y witchcraft. and that too at tho expense
OF the lives OF innocent n and women.
In that day II was said from the bench
that to deny the existence Of witchcraft
was to deny the Christian religion. Juries
would have done better. Then and now
questions OF fact we're best tried by Jury
In commenting on recent opinions handed
down In the courts Of Southern and West
crn states because they are "ineNcusahly
prollN and. moreover. nagrautly violate
the proprietics Of judicial llfc' tho New
York Lar Journal refers To- the decision
OF the supreme Court OF Utah In Harrison
Ns. lIarkcr. "a habeas corpus proceeding
tD ipfgYs1fur 10 ,s,tasHIN ~ "a ,sblfJ ,,sh
covers forty double column pages NJ thu
Pacific Reporter, with prevailing and dis
senting opinions. The majority opinions
include considerable tawdrV sentiment nj
rhetoric" says the Lar Journal while
dissenting opinion Of the Chlef Justice Ia
remarkable for its amenities III remarks
that his observations showing where the
prevailing opinion offends against the Con
stituton are attempted 20 be- met or more
correctly evaded. ny Mr. Justice Prick
The chief Justice also devotcs the follow
ing 70 Justice Frrk:
The members Of this cour, have taken
an oath that they will support, obey, and
defend the Constitution OF tho United
states and the Constitution Of this state
DC. btalics mincD Is u possible that
Justice Frick regards his OATH Of office and
the provision OF the Constitution men
toned ~ possessing tho distinction Of nov
city n nothing else and FOR that reason
li'' ~ renewed from ODSNTNinC tho ono ana
from ohcying tho other
'ln the course Of his opinion Justice
Frlck says
90 Y am total stranger to all tho par
tics 20 this action, and therefore can have
no bias either for or against either Of
them
Nothing having been said. either oral
or written. from which Il can bc inferred
that any one has the slightest suspicion
that Justice Prick In either consciously
or uncOrscously biased foy or against any
party connected with or affected by IN"
action ] fall to grasp tho purpose or to
comprehend the materially OF this some
what unusual declaration by judicial ON
Ger whose integrity. fairinlndednes. and
lmpartiality In deciding cases has never
been. and do not think ever will he, aiIes-
toned, regardless OF whether he may or
may not have personal acquaintance
with one or more persons who may he a
party or parties to an action lltiga;od IN
this court. IL cannot be that tho state
mont is intended to convey the impression
mat because he 'S stranger To the par
ties, and hence free from bias Justice
Frick Is therefore less likclv To- orr I'm his
consideration Of the cas-" than hts asSn-
ciat"s. because, as lie II aware. IL devel-
op"d during the oral discussions OF the
case IN the consultation room that tho
members ~ this court one and All are
I
action. and that they knew nothing ~ tho
case except what the record discloses A
! Judicial officer coming forward IN defence
OF hts own integrity and fairmindedn...
which - not questioned by any one may
not the members OF the legal profession
and the .aymen as we'll who NAV chance
10 road the opinion cont aining such matter
conclude that there Is bare possibility
that Il was impelled by tho same state ~,
mind that causes a certain class OF people
! mentioned in Holy Writ to hee when no
man pursueth,' namely, a troubled rather
/ than tranquil and undisturbed con-
science?''
The Supreme Court Of Michigan IN 70
/ Hartleroe's will decides that statement,
! made by the testatriX NJ about The time
she made her will as 10 the conduct OF a
/ legatee are admissible on the issue OF IN
! due irfuence raised against him Il an
peared that the testatrix shortly betor.
! her death executed a new will, in which
she beGu"athed large part OF her prop
erty TO certain church and it's rector
! Up 10 few weeks before making her
VIII che was an entire stranger TO both
/ the rector and the church. and by the
new will she changed n former ono II
which she had given her property to CON
testant her daughter. There was no evil
dence OF a change OF feeling between tes-
tatriK and contestant. hut II appeared
that the rector during test1trix', Hines.
had been a frequent caller on her and
had had something 10 do with employing
TN" attorney who made the new VIII i
was held that a hduclarv relation existed
between testatriS and tho rector and that
tho proof was sufficient to raise a pre-
sumption Of undue influence on his par
which he was bound 10 overcome
A ruling as 10 tho adf1is.ibIlI'v in ev'