Thurlow v. Massachusetts

THESE cases were all brought up from the respective State courts by writs of error issued under the twenty-fifty section of the Judiciary Act, and were commonly known by the name of the License Cases.

Involving the same question, they were argued together, but by different counsel. When the decision of the court was pronounced, it was not accompanied by any opinion of the court, as such. But six of the justices gave separate opinions, each for himself. Four of them treated the cases collectively in one opinion, whilst the remaining two expressed opinions in the cases separately. Hence it becomes necessary for the reporter to make a statement in each case, and to postpone the opinions until the completion of all the statements. The arguments of counsel in each case will of course follow immediately after the statement in that case. They are placed in the order in which they are put by the Chief Justice in his opinion, but where the justices have given separate opinions in each case, the order is observed which they themselves have chosen.

Mr. Chief Justice Taney, one opinion, three cases. (p. 573.)

Mr. Justice McLean, three opinions.

No. 1. Thurlow v. Massachusetts. (p. 586.)

No. 2. Peirce v. New Hampshire. (p. 593.)

No. 3. Fletcher v. Rhode Island. (p. 596.)

Mr. Justice Catron, two opinions.

No. 1. Peirce v. New Hampshire. (p. 597.)

No. 2. Thurlow v. Massachusetts. (p. 609.)

Mr. Justice Daniel, one opinion, three cases. (p. 611.)

Mr. Justice Woodbury, one opinion, three cases. (p. 618.)

Mr. Justice Grier, one opinion, three cases. (p. 631.)