In Lighter Vein.

A MATTER OF JURISDICTION.

The Philadelphia Saturday Post, January 26, 1901, contains some elever remarks on the Supreme Court, and after speaking of the merits of Justices Harlan and Brewer as dinner companions, is the following: In Chief Justice Marshall's time, when he had such men as Joe Story and Bushrod Washington and other brilliant men, the Court all lived rather apart from the rest of the world and dined together at a sort of "mess" every day, only dining once a year in public, at the White House. Justice Story was once rallied on this aloofness and explained it drolly:

"The fact is, we Justices take no part in the society of the place. We dine once a year with the President and that is all. On other days we dine together and discuss at table the questions that are argued before us. We are great ascetics, and even deny ourselves wine, except in wet weather."

Here the Justice paused as if thinking this last statement placed too severe a tax upon human credulity, and then he added slyly :

"What I say about wine, sir, gives you our rule; but it does sometimes happen that the Chief Justice will say to me when the cloth is removed: 'Brother Story, step to the window and see if it does not look like rain.' And if I tell him that the sun is shining, Justice Marshall will sometimes reply: All the better; for our jurisdiction extends over so large a territory that the doctrine of chances makes it certain that it must be raining somewhere.'

EMINENT JURISTS.

The death of Lord Russell has caused the press to print many anecdotes showing somewhat the characteristics of some of England's legal lights. Lord Russell, as a boy, was precocious; his memory was wonderful; he was a great card-player and race promoter; he was an inveterate snuff-taker and collector of snuff-boxes; acted as a boy at times; during the addresses of opposing counsel he, at times, pretended to go to sleep to disconcert the speaker; but he dominated and ruled. This last trait is shown by the following from the Sun

Eng.): "One who spent eleven years in his office shows a book presented by Sir Charles to him. The inscription runs: To From his onetime master." "

Lord Thurlow was polite but testy. He once built a house in the neighborhood of London. Now, he was first cheated by his architect, and then he cheated himself, for the house cost more than he expected; so he would never go into it. As he was coming out of the Queen's drawing-room, a lady whom he knew stopped him, and asked him when he was going into it. "Madam," said he, with his well-known politeness, "the Queen has just asked me that impudent question, and as I would not tell her, I will not tell

you."

Lord Eldon, he of the limp, wrinkled forehead, and bushy eyebrows, was, in truth a great lawyer, but as to pleasantness, note these:

Sir George Rose, having the note book of the regular reporter of Lord Eldon's decisions put into his hand, with a request that he would take a note for him of any decision which should be given, entered in it the following lines as a full record of all that was material which had occurred during the day:

"Mr. Leach

Made a speech,

Angry, neat, but wrong;
Mr. Hart,

On the other part,

Was heavy, dull and long;

Mr. Parker

Made the case darker,

Which was dark enough without;

Mr. Cooke

Cited his book,

And the chancellor said-I doubt."

This reached the chancellor. Soon after, Mr. Rose having to argue before him a very untenable proposition, he gave his opinion. very gravely, felicitly concluding thus: "For these reasons the judgment must be against your clients; and here, Mr. Rose, the chancellor does not doubt."

Lord Eldon was limping down High street, of Edinburgh, one day when he heard a young lady remark to her companion, "That is the famous - the lame lawyer." He turned round and said, with his not unwonted coarseness: "You lie, ma'am! I am a lame man, but not a lame lawyer."

To Lord Eldon has been attributed this advice to a young lawyer: "If you wish to succeed, you must live like a hermit and work like a horse."

THE BRIEF.

VOL. III.

SECOND QUARTER, 1901.

NO. 3.

Original Articles.

LEGAL RIGHT OF A STATE TO LIMIT THE
SUFFRAGE.'

BY JOHN WOODWARD,

A JUSTICE OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF New YORK.

Gentlemen of the Phi Delta Phi Society: The recent action of the state of North Carolina in amending its constitution, requiring an educational qualification for voters and excepting from its operation the descendants of those who were permitted to vote in 1867, prior to the adoption of the XVth amendment, has given rise to much discussion, and has brought forward a great variety of suggestion as to the duty of the Federal government in the premises. There is a popular impression that there is a power lodged in Washington which may regulate and control all matters in which the rights of citizens are in any manner involved. Those who hold this impression forget that the government at Washington is merely the custodian of so much of the sovereign power of the people as has been specially delegated, and that it has no power to deal with questions outside of the limits fixed by the constitution, an instrument created at a time when the people were jealous of their rights, and when each power surrendered was carefully considered and limited.

1 An address before the New York Phi Delta Phi Club, New York City, October 8, 1900.