Page:Story of a Great Court.djvu/122

 Union of the States, could have lasted a single year or fulfilled the high trusts committed to it if offenses against its laws could not have been punished without the consent of the State in which the culprit was found."

These propositions seem now to be very plain and simple truths, but not so in 1859. The judgment of reversal was followed by a storm of popular indignation in Wisconsin, which will be fully described in its proper place. It is sufficient now to say that in the judicial elections of 1855, 1857, 1859 and 1860 the question whether the Booth case was rightly decided and should be adhered to formed practically the sole issue, and that notwithstanding their radically different positions in that case both Justices Crawford and Smith lost their seats by reason of such positions.

The ordinary litigation which came before the Court during Judge Crawford's brief term of two years was not great in volume, yet some important fundamental propositions took their places in the jurisprudence of the young state.

One of the most important cases was the Blossom case, already referred to, where it was held that the Supreme Court had been endowed by the constitution with original jurisdiction in cases publici juris, involving the prerogatives and franchises of the state and the liberties of the people. The great importance of this principle and its value to the people of the state was later clearly demonstrated in the railroad cases and the other cases of absorbing public interest and importance which have followed that case. Had the Court been shorn of this great power by a narrow construction of the grant of power contained in Section 3 of Article VII of the constitution the result would have been