Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 02.pdf/314

 The New York Court of Appeals. gious. His long seclusion from public life was regarded as a public deprivation. He died with unimpaired powers, in 1883. Good examples of his opinions may be found in Miller v. Danks, 1 N. Y. 129 (dissenting), on the constitutionality of an exemption of personalty from execution for antecedent debts; Leggett v. Perkins, 2 N. Y. 297, on a trust to receive and pay over rents and

profits of land; Chau tauqua Co. Bank v. White, 6 N. Y. 236, on the scope of a re ceiver's deed; and Talmage v. Pell, 7 N. Y. 328, on an ille gal purchase of State stocks by a bank. Ward Hunt. Of Ward Hunt it is sufficient to say that he was a scholarly man, was governor of the State, and at his death was a judge of the United States Su preme Court. Henry E. Davies. Henry E. Davies was one of the most ADDISON laborious and exhaus tive of the old school of judges, who thought it essential to write essays for opinions, reviewing every case ever decided on the point in question, and many that steered clear of the point, dis criminating, reconciling, approving, or disap proving, and supplying a small text-book where an announcement of the rule of the case would have been more satisfactory to everybody but the counsel; the men of pre cedent rather than of principle. Excellent examples of these opinions are afforded in People v. Canal Appraisers, 33 N. Y. 46 1, on compensation for diversion by the

State of the waters of the Mohawk River for the Erie Canal; Henry v. Root, 33 N. Y. 526, on ratification of an infant's contract; DuBois v. Ray, 35 N. Y. 162, on reading "have" for "leave "in a will; Gardner v. Ogden, 22 N. Y. 327, on jurisdiction to com pel conveyance of land in another State. It is probable, however, that such opinions were valuable at that stage of our jurisprudence. They are monuments of learning and labor, and have supplied learning and saved labor to succeeding judges and lawyers. It is said that Judge Davies regarded his opinion, delivered when he was upon the Supreme Court bench, in the caseof the Cum berland Coal Company v. Sherman, 30 Barb. 553, as one of the most important which he ever delivered. That case for the first time in our State, I think, declares the principle that directors of corpo rations are to be re garded as trustees, and are accountable to the GARDINER. corporation and its stockholders as trus tees. He was one of the best circuit judges I ever knew, and one of the few who have ever had the courage to rule out merely cumulative evidence in the first instance. He despatched business rapidly and accurately. He pre sided at the famous trial of Mrs. Cunning ham, for murder, in the city of New York. I am informed " that he went to his library after dinner on Friday evening of the trial to prepare his charge to the jury, and that he never left his chair until the breakfastbell rang the following morning at eight o'clock, when he was finishing his charge.