Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 22.pdf/176

 160

The Green Bag

lawyer of today are looked upon as ele mentary in federal jurisprudence. In

Jefferson,11 and The Steamer Orleans v. The Phzrbus,12 the court in opinions by

Bank of Augusta v. Earle,8 upon the Judge Story had decided that here as in ground of comity, it was ﬁrst decided that corporations of one state can sue in

England the maritime jurisdiction of the federal courts was restricted to the ebb

the courts of another, and in 1841 the

and flow of the tide.

License cases from Massachusetts, Rhode

It was ﬁnely said by Matthew Arnold in praise of Sophocles that “he saw life

Island, and New Hampshire, reported under the name of Thurlow v. Massa chusetts, Fletcher v. Rhode Island and

read the opinions of the Chief Justice,

steadily and saw it whole.”

So if you

Pierce v. New Hampshire,9 came be

whether

fore the court, and it was decided that a

question is to be examinedidiscussed and

state can regulate the traﬁic of intoxi

decided, or the various questions requir ing the application of the principles of maritime or the municipal law or reme dial law are to be determined, you ﬁnd

cating liquors within its borders.

Lu

ther v. Borden10 brought up a phase of the Dorr Rebellion. The action was trespass for assault. The defendants justiﬁed under the authority of the government which had appointed them. The court, however, was not to be en ticed into deciding which government was legal, and while saying the question was purely one of political power to be

determined by the political, not by the

an

important

constitutional

displayed the same calm deliberation which surveys and grasps the whole subject, and then without wavering moves

gradually but irresistibly to a conclusion. He possessed the power, the gift of his birthhour common to Mansﬁeld, Marshall, and Shaw, of looking with illuminated

insight into the future, which led him to

judicial department of the government,

develop and administer the law so that

declared that the state courts having decided the question the federal tribunal had no jurisdiction to interfere. In

it should be progressive in its operation

February, 1845, the Congress by ap propriate legislation had extended the

without weakening its practical and positive application to the case to be decided. In the serenity of the judicial atmos

admiralty jurisdiction over the great

phere twenty-four years had now passed,

lakes and navigable waters of the coun

and the political animosities of earlier

try. The question at once arose, whether the act was constitutional, and the Genesee Chief having been libeled for collision on Lake Ontario with an

days had long since faded away. Allwho came in contact with the court, or knew

of the performance of its functions, recognized and conceded his ﬁtness for

other vessel, it was presented for decision.

the exalted oﬂice.

Of this opinion, reported in 12 How. 443, which fully sustained the act, noth

been slowly ripening, until in the esti mation of the bar and the public men of his time, he was not only the titular,

His greatness had

ing but commendation has been written. The Chief Justice rose fully to the height of the argument, and in lucidity and elegance of expression the opinion ranks

edged head of the department. But a cloud which when it ﬁrst appeared in the

with the best juristic efforts. It needed to be convincing, for in The Thomas

the servant of the prophet saw from

but by intellectual primacy the acknowl

horizon was no bigger than that which

a 13 Pet. 519. 0 5 How. 504.

10 1 How. 1.

n 10 Wheat. 428. ‘7 11 Pet. 175.