possessing the point of view of the large financial interests of the nation to the exclusion of all others. Some criticized his participation in the case of Ownbey v. Morgan, 256 U. S. 94 (1921). In that case he had successfully argued in this Court in defense of the constitutionality of a Delaware rule of procedure, relating to attachment cases involving nonresident defendants, which conditioned the defendant's right to appear and contest the merits of the plaintiff's demand upon the defendant's first giving special security, even where the defendant was unable to furnish such security. On February 5, 1925, the Senate confirmed his nomination, however, with only six votes cast in opposition. After sixteen years of distinguished service on this Court, he was appointed Chief Justice by President Franklin Roosevelt. The appointment was universally acclaimed; and the Senate confirmed the nomination without a dissenting voice being raised. Of the six members who had opposed his confirmation in 1925, two remained in the Senate in 1941 when his nomination as Chief Justice was presented. One of these was Senator George Norris, who stated: "In the years that have passed I became convinced, and am now convinced, that in my opposition to the confirmation of his nomination I was entirely in error." Harlan Stone served on this Court for twenty-one years-sixteen years as an Associate Justice and five years as Chief Justice. He served during one of the most significant periods in the history of this Court. It was a period of great social readjustment in the nation as a whole. Movement and change were the order of the day. The trend toward a new social equilibrium was felt in every aspect of the nation's life. Inevitably, the impact of the times was felt on this Court. No man played a more vital role in the development of the law during this crucial period than Harlan Stone. Some slight understanding of the importance of the part he played may be gained by observing that in the entire history of this Court probably no other member lived to see so many views expressed in dissent subsequently accepted by the majority of the Court as the law of the land. To Harlan Stone, the great hazard to the perpetuation of constitutional government was narrow and illiberal construction of constitutional provisions. As a corollary to that basic proposition, he believed a judge, confronted with constitutional issues, to be under the continuing obligation of guarding against the tendency to confuse his own personal feelings as to the wisdom and expediency of legislation with the question of the constitutionality of that legislation. Self-restraint in the exercise of judicial power was to him an essential prerequisite to the successful functioning of our system of government. But although insisting that the exercise of judicial power be confined to its proper sphere, he did not hesitate to exert that power fully in cases where it appeared to him that basic safeguards of the fundamental charter had been overstepped. Most frequently, those were cases involving contentions that civil liberties had been denied; and in those opinions some of his most eloquent writing appears. He gave much thought to the problem of preserving individual freedom in the complexities of modern society and under a system of dual sovereignty which characterizes our form of government. He was well aware that the problem is not a simple one and is not one which may be solved by mechanical application of a convenient formula. The "perpetual question of constitutional law," he wrote, is to determine "where the line is to be drawn which marks the boundary between the appropriate field of individual liberty and right and that of government action for the larger good, so as to insure the least sacrifice of both types of social advantage." But Harlan Stone's contributions were not confined to the field of constitutional law. His written opinions deal with the whole range of problems which come before this Court; and in considering his contributions in these diverse fields, one cannot but be impressed with the scope of his capacities and the influence of his thought. As Chief Justice, Harlan Stone displayed the same energy and conscientious devotion to duty which had characterized his earlier service on the Court. He presided over the Court in the dark years of war. Difficult problems arising from the conduct of total war by a democratic nation frequently were presented for adjudication. The period was marked, also, by the continuing development of the Conference of the Senior Circuit Judges and other devices contributing to the improvement of standards of judicial administration in the federal courts. Harlan Stone was a man of warm human qualities. His broad interests, genial personality, and lack of pretension won for him the respect and affection of his brethren on the Court and an unusually wide circle of friends off the bench. At home, he enjoyed the happy comradeship of his gracious and gifted life's partner and their two worthy sons. I recall with pleasure my own associations with him. I will ever cherish the honor of receiving his designation to serve as Chief Justice of the Emergency Court of Appeals. Our personal and official relations were marked by his never-failing cordiality and his high sense of public responsibility. While not absorbed by his official duties, he was able to pursue his deep interest in literature and the arts. His intellectual curiosity was insatiable. Few men attain so well-rounded a development of their capacities. The high place of Harlan Stone in the history of this Court and of this nation is well assured. American jurisprudence has been enriched by his creative touch. His life and character were in complete accord with the finest of democratic traditions. THE CHIEF JUSTICE directed that the resolutions be spread upon the minutes of the Court. TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Page 832, 850 A. B. T. Mfg. Co. v. Nat. Slug Rejectors...... Aetna Portland Cement Co., Trade Comm'n v. 831 683 .... 826 A. J. Paretta Contracting Co. v. United States.. 832 Ambrosia Chocolate Co. v. Ambrosia Cake Bakery.. 882 850 821 Andrew J. McPartland, Inc. v. M. Ward & Co..... 875 Aspinook Corp. v. Bright. Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co., Anderson v. . 840, 846 821 854 854 854 |