Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 02.pdf/216

 yeremiah Sullivan Black. room be declared to be unsurpassed." Sec retary Blaine, in his remarkable review of contemporary men and events, declares that Judge Black had " attained unto every ex cellence of mental discipline described by Lord Bacon. Reading had made him a full man, talking a ready man, writing an exact man. The judicial literature of the English tongue may be searched in vain for finer models than are found in the opinions of Judge Black when he sat, and was worthy to sit, as the associate of John Bannister Gibson on the Supreme bench of Pennsylva nia." Something of his judicial temper and freedom of expression may be gleaned from a brief extract from his famous dissenting opin ion in the case of Hole v. Rittenhouse. It was an action of ejectment, and was before the Supreme Court three times. On the first hearing Black, C.-J., delivered the opin ion of the court. Justices Lowrie and Gib son concurred with him; Justices Lewis and Woodward dissented.1 A venire being awarded, the case again came up, and was decided by a court the composition of which had somewhat changed. Judge Lewis had become Chief-Justice, and Gibson had been succeeded by Knox. The new Chief-Justice squarely reversed the old.2 It was then Black filed his dissenting opinion, which has not been enshrined in the State Re ports, but is to be found in 2 Philadelphia Reports, 417. Besides other things, he said : —

191

dead; and the law which should have protected those sacred rights has died with them. It is a melancholy reflection that the property of a citi zen should be held by a tenure so frail. But 1 new lords, new laws,' is the order of the day. Hereafter, if any man be offered a title which the Supreme Court has decided to be good, let him not buy if the judges who made the decision are dead; if they are living, let him get an in surance on their lives, for ye know not what a day or an hour may bring forth. "The majority of this court changes on the average once every nine years, without counting the chances of death and resignation. If each new set of judges shall consider themselves at liberty to overthrow the doctrines of their prede cessors, our system of jurisprudence (if system it may be called) would be the most fickle, un certain, and vicious that the civilized world ever saw. A French constitution, or a South Ameri can republic, or a Mexican administration would be an immortal thing in comparison to the short lived principles of Pennsylvania law. The rules of property, which ought to be as steadfast as the hills, will become as unstable as the waves. To avoid this great calamity, I know of no re source but that of stare decisis. "I claim nothing for the great men who have gone before us on the score of their marked and manifest superiority; but I would stand by th Jr decisions, because they have passed into the law and became a part of it, have been relied and acted on, and rights have grown up under them which it is unjust and cruel to take away."

"The judgment now about to be given is one of 'death's doings.' No one can doubt that if Judge Gibson and Judge Coulter had lived, the plaintiff could not have been thus deprived of his property, and thousands of other men would have been saved from the imminent danger, to which they are now exposed, of losing the homes they have labored and paid for. But they are

It can easily be believed that so pro nounced a dissenting opinion created some feeling among the members of the court, and a profound sensation throughout the Commonwealth. In the case of the Com monwealth v. Erie and Northeastern Rail road Co., 3 Casey (27 Penn.), 351, he tersely expressed the law of Pennsylvania in its limitation upon the exercise of corpo rate powers : —

1 7 Harris (19 Perm.), 305. 2 1 Casey (25 Penn.), 491. This famous case, sent back for trial in the court below, came up on error the third time, after Judge Black had left the bench, and for the third time was reversed. No report of it appears after 1860. 1 Wright (37 Penn.), 116.

"If you assert that a corporation has certain privileges, show us the words of the Legislature conferring them. Failing in this, you must give up your claim, for nothing else can possibly avail you. A doubtful charter does not exist, because