Evening star., 1922-02-26
Fifty Years Ago
in The Star

In the early days of the republic
prejudice existed against any sort Of
| uniforms or costumes
Gowns for for officials save those of
| r. the Army and Navy.
"SeAS' This was a reaction
against the monarchical usages of
| the old world. Though from time 10
time gowns were proposed fer judges.
the movement gained no headway for
| many years. In The Star of February
/ p, 1872, another angle of this matter
| is discussed. Though since then the
| silk gown has been very generally
adopted by judges: the distinctive
Earb for lawyers has never found
favor.
"Since the recent removal of the
criminal court in st. Louis into the
palatial -Four Courts with its ele-
and walnut furniture. the legal gem
try In that city have come out strong
in favor of the proposition OF ono OF
the Judges for the donning OF black
silk gowns by the lawyers in court.
This is not altogether the result of the
aristocratic splendor of their gor-
geous surroundings, above noticed,
nor is it due entirely to the abiding
faith st. Louis lawyers have in COM
mon with their fellow citizens that
the future and they must do all in
their power to enhance It's dignity and
| that Of its chief ornament. the bar.
even In such a matter as the legal
silk gown was advocated on no such
practical grounds. The true reason
why the poet cal Judge Primm pro-
posed it and the lawyers favored IL
was simply, in the language of the
difficult to distinguish the counsel
from the prisoner and often one is
taken for the other This is shock
ing. positively shocking. II 1t is
necessary the distinction should be
made: however. the silk gown will
have to be generally adopted. for il
is not always possible in other cities
beside st. Louis to distinguish the
lawyer from his client merely by the
moral excellence stamped upon the
countenance Of the former"
A jury in damage suit fifty years
ago decided that the street railway
company could not
Jury's Decision compel the use of
transfers at the
w @AosAes' junction point The
court, and the Conclusion is thus set
forth in The Star Of February "a.
1872:
"A question of interest to street
car passengers was decided yesterday
in the case of Thomas ]. Davis
against the Washington and George
town Railroad Company. The plain
tiff complains that transfer ticket
emitting himsto go up fth street was
refused because he did not get on
the 7th street car at the point OF
junction. but walked up to near the
Patent Office and got on car there.
In other words, the case involved the
whole question of the right of the COM
pany to refuse to recognize transfer
tickets not presented at the point OF
junction. 1t was argued on behalf of the
company that they have the right to
make the regulation that transfers
should only be received at the juno
tions to prevent fraud on the COM
pany. On the other hand. it was
maintained that the bylaws or reg
ulations in relation to transfers set
up by the company are not authorized
by law or their charter and, there
fore, are void. Judge Macarthur in
structed the jury that IL they thought
! the rule in relation to transfers.
which made them good at the juno
F, ton only, reasonable one, theN
! should find for the defendant, other
! wise not. The jury decided that 1t
was not reasonable, or authorized BY
the companys charter returning
i verdict for plaintiff with damages at
| cents, the price of the ticket.
1.-The company must now make up
| it's mind to consult the pubic CON
| venience, instead of its own. in the
matter of accepting transfers not
| presented at the Junction