Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 10.pdf/569

 53Q

WIT AND WISDOM OF CHIEF JUSTICE LOGAN E. BLECKLEY, AS SHOWN IN THE GEORGIA REPORTS. A Paper read at the Fifteenth Annual Session of the Georgia Bar Association, held at Atlanta, July 7, 1898. By Albert H. Russell of the Augusta Bar. MR. President and Gentlemen of the Bar Association : — Every law yer who is familiar with the reports of the Supreme Court of Georgia must have been deeply impressed by the opinions of Chief Justice Bleckley. This is so not only be cause of his great ability as a jurist, but also on account of the quaint humor with which he enlivened the discussion of intricate legal questions, and the attractive style in which all his opinions are written. They are the only ones of their kind, and are remembered when those of other able judges are for gotten. It is of interest to note that since his res ignation from the bench, at the request of the court, he wrote the opinion in the case of Green v. Railroad Co., 97th Ga. 36, and in Board of Education v. Purse, 28th SouthEastern Reporter, 901, a letter written by him to counsel for plaintiff in error is cited as authority to sustain the position of the majority of the court. It is not my purpose to discuss his opin ions from a legal standpoint, but to lay be fore you a collection I have made from his many sayings that have attracted my atten tion, some for their wit, and all for their originality. "Let the declaration and the copy note, in this case, be read together in a spirit of candor, and there is not one man in a thousand who would be likely to misunderstand them. To miss the meaning, the reader would have to be a man of much learning, and one whom much learning hath made mad." — Jennings v. Wright, 54th Ga. 539. "When man and wife cooperate for good they can do much good; and so, when they combine against third persons and cooperate for evil, they can do much harm. In protecting women,

courts and juries should be careful to protect men, too, for men are not only useful to general society, but to women especially." — Humphrey v. Copeland, 54th Ga. 548. "In this case no appeal is made to our knowl edge of law, but we are invited to exercise our skill upon a couple of facts — one, whether a house was built according to contract, and the other, whether the work was paid for. We have exercised such skill as we possess, touching the mysteries of building and paying, and the result is, that we are unable to make a better verdict for the plaintiff in error than the jury made, and so the judgment of the court below must be affirmed." — Oglethorpe Mfg. Co. v. Van Winkle, 54 Ga. 569. "If the decision, foreshadowed by the court, had been one in denial of the motion, perhaps it would have been too late to withdraw; but we do not see why a victory may not be declined in the very moment of success. Men do not always know what to pray for; and when they see that an ill-chosen petition is about to be granted, to be obliged to persevere in it and accept the boon, whether they will or not, would be a strict rule of practice. It would seem that they ought to be allowed to drop their suit and quit the court — taxed only with the costs." — Cherry v. Home B. & L. Ass., 55th Ga. 20. "The brother was not sworn as a witness, but the sisters both testified, and, for women, they swore hard. One of them must have been in deep error, for they disagreed widely." — Mixon v. Pollok, 55th Ga. 321. "The charges of the bill do indeed make a diabolical case. According to them, Potts was a most mercenary and seductive rascal; his wife's marriage was a fraud; her last will and testament was a fraud — only her death was fair. If, in very truth, there was such a scheme of wicked ness, it is gratifying to find that it was mercifully overruled, so that it did no real harm to these complainants. It cannot be denied that Potts started out as executor and came in at last as