Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 04.pdf/298

 The Supreme Court of Indiana. remained only a few months, responding to the first call for volunteers for the War of the Rebellion. He served in the active ser vice until June, 1863, when he was. transferred to the Veteran Reserve Corps, serving in it until his term expired in the following year. While in the army a copy of Blackstone was a part of his outfit. On his return he re sumed his reading, and soon entered on the practice at Bowling Green, the county-seat of Clay County. In 1866 he was an un successful Republican candidate for prose cuting attorney. In 1882 he was a success ful candidate for the office of circuit judge in a Democratic circuit, having been previously appointed, in 1881, by Governor Porter, to a vacancy occurring in that office. In 1888 he was elected judge of the Su preme Court, taking his seat Jan. 7, 1889, and succeeding Judge Niblack. He came to the bench when the court's docket was crowded, and cheerfully took up the burden his posi tion imposed. The court was soon involved in controverted constitutional questions which imposed great labor upon the judges. The opinions delivered by Judge Coffey are usually short, and contain the citations of comparatively few authorities; but never theless they are clear and distinct, the propo sitions involved being stated with perspicuity and decided force. Upon the whole, these opinions are shorter than those of any judge who has sat upon the bench within the last twenty years, excepting those of Judge Biddie. His first most considerable opinion was delivered in a murder case, Grubb v. The State (117 Ind. 277). In The State v. Denny (118 Ind. 382) he upheld the right of local self-government secured to a muni cipality by the provisions of the Consti tution, and held a statute wherein the legislature had attempted to deprive them of that right, void. The State v. Blend (121 Ind. 514) was a similar decision; while in a case of the same name (121 Ind. 514) the right of the State to take charge of the police force of a city was asserted. In The State v. Gorby (122 Ind. 17) the power of 35

273

the legislature to take away from the chief executive of a State the right to fill a va cancy in an office by appointment was de nied. The Barber Asphalt Paving Co. v. Edgerton (125 Ind. 455) involved the valid ity of a statute for the improvement of streets, and the issuing of bonds to run a long period of years, and making them a lien upon the property assessed. This stat ute was upheld. Renihan v. Wright (125 Ind. 536) presented a difficult question as to the right to recover damages from an undertaker for the losing of a body of the plaintiff's child. Welsh v. The State (126 Ind. 71), involving the unlawful sale of liquor upon the Ohio River, and presented difficult constitutional questions as to the boundary between this State and Kentucky. Shuman v. The City of Fort Wayne (127 Ind. 109) involved the right of a city to exact a license from a pawnbroker; while The Indianapolis Cable Street Railway Co. v. The Citizens' Street Railway Co. (127 Ind. 369) presented the difficult question of the right of a street railway company to occupy a street to the entire exclusion of another company. One of the recent cases in which Judge Coffey wrote the opinion was Hovey v. The State (127 Ind. 588), wherein it was claimed that the right of the courts to mandate the Governor of a State existed; but this was denied. Other cases of import ance are Gilson v. The Board, etc. (128 Ind. 65), on constitutional law; Mann v. The Belt R. R. Co. (128 Ind. 138), on negligence; The Board of Commissioners of Fountain County v. The Board of Commissioners of Warren County (128 Ind. 295), on the power of one county to compel an adjoining county to pay its proportion of the cost of building a bridge over a stream forming the boundary between them; and The Western, etc. v. The Citizens' Street Railway Co. (128 Ind. 525), involving the power of a city to compel a street railway company to pave that part of the street occupied by it with its tracks. Perhaps Judge Coffey's usefulness in the consultation room is as much felt as any