Page:History of the Supreme court of the United States (IA historyofsupreme00myeriala).pdf/9



To a work such as this, avoiding as it does both theories and conclusions, and confining itself strictly to ascertainable facts, little or no prefatory note is required. Neither is any explanation necessary as to why the author chose to write the historical narrative of the Supreme Court of the United States. All departments of human activity are subject, or should be, to scrutiny and investigation, and the series of facts discovered become a definite part of knowledge to be explored, assetnbled and disseminated.

Quite true, while research has hitherto penctrated into all other branches of historical development, the courts have been singularly exempt. That they have been immune from searching inquiry; that around them has been created a myth, a fiction of supermundane superiority, is no reason why the case should continue so. On the contrary, the more their history and course have been shrouded in tradition and mystery, the more pressing is the necessity for learning and describing the actual facts. Only those who for sentimental or ulterior purposes would seek to disseminate fiction rather than facts can object to a serious inquiry into any institution and the collocation of verified facts. Such an objection at once discredits and disposes of itself in its obvious attack upon an attempt to bring out the truth, and in its aim to suppress the facts from becoming public information.

The long roll of facts herein set forth have not, it is needless to say, been created by the author. Good, bad or indifferent, they are all matters of record; there they lie in the archives awaiting the patient and sincere research of the