Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 03.pdf/206

Rh he resigned his seat to accept the office of judge of the circuit court, and in 1865, in turn, resigned that station to become a judge of the Supreme Court. He was re-elected in 1868 and 1870, the last time without opposition. In 1876 he was the nominee of was defeated. He practised law at St. Louis until 1880, when he retired to a suburban home near Canton, Missouri. Occasionally he advises as consulting counsel, but is no longer in active practice. In 1870 he published a revision of the statutes of the State, and in 1872 a supplement thereto. These publications were admirably and systematically arranged. Until the official revision of 1879, "Wagner's Statutes" were almost universally cited. Judge Wagner's opinions appear in twenty-seven volumes of the reports (38-64). Some of them are leading cases, and so classified by authors. Many of them display his rare powers to fine advantage. Among those which can be studied with profit are: Hannibal, etc., R. R. Co. v. Marion County, 36 Mo. 294; Hayden v. Tucker, 37 Mo. 214; Huelsenkanp v. Citizen's Ry. Co., 37 Mo. 537; Gerhardt v. Boatmen's Sav. Inst., 38 Mo. 60; State v. Starr, 38 Mo. 270; State ex rel. v. Fletcher, 39 Mo. 388; Blair v. Ridgely, 41 Mo. 63; Strouse v. Drennon, 42 Mo. 289; Washington University v. Rowse, 42 Mo. 308; Gibson v. Pacific Railroad, 46 Mo. 163 (2 Thomps. Negl. 944); State ex rel. v. Gatzweiler, 49 Mo. 17; Garretzen v. Duenckel, 50 Mo. 104; State ex rel. v. Boone County Court, 50 Mo. 317 (dissenting); State ex rel. v. Saline County Court, 51 Mo. 350 (dissenting); McVey v. McVey, 51 Mo. 406; Chisholm v. National Ins. Co., 52 Mo. 213; State ex rel. v. Lefhis party, then largely in the minority, and fingwell, 54 Mo. 258; Dunn v. Railey, 58 Mo. 134; St. Louis v. Griswold, 58 Mo. 175; Lewis v. St. Louis, etc., R. R. Co., 59 Mo. 495; Greenabaum v. Elliott, 60 Mo. 25; Isabel v. Hannibal, etc., R. R. Co., 60 Mo. 475; Bailey v. Smock, 61 Mo. 213; Lammert v. Lidwell, 62 Mo. 188; Hamilton v. Marks, 63 Mo. 167; Dunn v. White, 63 Mo. 181.

A competent authority has said of Judge Wagner: "He possesses a strong habit of attention and a powerful memory. These enable him to seize, with great rapidity, upon all the elements of a subject, and to hold them in one connected image in his mind's eye. His most elaborate judgments are thus fully organized in his mind before he puts pen to paper, and then they are written out at one sitting, with seldom an erasure or interlineation."

FRANCIS M. BLACK

Walter L. Lovelace.

By dint of industry and determination, Judge Lovelace reached the summit of his ambition. He was born in Charlotte County, Virginia, Oct. 1, 1831, of parents whose circumstances were exceedingly limited. On the death of his father in 1833, his widowed mother removed to Montgomery County,