FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   585   586   587   588   589   590   591   592   593   594   595   596   597   598   599   600   601   602   603   604   605   606   607   608   609  
610   611   612   613   614   615   616   617   618   619   620   621   622   623   624   625   626   627   628   629   630   >>  
I might be present at the opening of the Court. Was it reasonable, nay, was it possible, that I should do otherwise? It is known to be a rule of the Supreme Court not to postpone an argument for other engagements of counsel. If neither counsel is present, the case goes to the foot of the docket, to be reached again only after two or three years; if one of the counsel only appears, he makes an oral argument, and a printed brief is submitted on the other side. In my view, it would have been trifling with the rights of my clients either to submit their case on a printed brief or to postpone it for two years. I had no one to send to the Court in my place. To despatch a letter with an excuse was a liberty I did not feel justified in taking, and if taken, it might fail of its object, as the Court, when informed of the circumstances, must have believed that no member of the delegation would take advantage of my absence if he could, and that he could not if he would, since the vote had been already determined in a meeting of the delegation, and that determination could not be reconsidered or changed without the desertion to the minority of one of the majority. But whatever might be the opinion of others, my duty appeared to myself extremely plain. There was nothing to be done in the Convention but the merely ministerial duty of declaring what had already been determined, which duty could certainly be performed by another as well as myself, while, on the other hand, no one but myself could act in Court for my clients. It is true that some of my associates expressed to me their apprehension that the minority might appeal to the Convention, and that the Convention might arbitrarily overrule the delegation; but I answered them as I repeat now, that neither the minority of the delegation nor the Convention itself had any right to interpose. We were not asking a favor, but exercising a right. Whether a person not present could vote was not the question. Persons did not vote except on unimportant questions and by general consent. States voted; the vote of each State was delivered by its Chairman, who collected the voices of his delegation and announced the result. There was nothing in the reason of the thing, nothing in any rule or usage of the Convention, which required the voices of the delegation to be collected at the instant of announcing the result. They might be collected one minute beforehand, or, as in the present instan
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   585   586   587   588   589   590   591   592   593   594   595   596   597   598   599   600   601   602   603   604   605   606   607   608   609  
610   611   612   613   614   615   616   617   618   619   620   621   622   623   624   625   626   627   628   629   630   >>  



Top keywords:

delegation

 

Convention

 

present

 

minority

 

collected

 

counsel

 
printed
 
clients
 

determined

 

postpone


argument

 
result
 

voices

 

apprehension

 
arbitrarily
 

appeal

 

answered

 
expressed
 

overrule

 

performed


declaring

 

ministerial

 

repeat

 
associates
 

unimportant

 
announced
 

reason

 

Chairman

 

delivered

 

minute


instan

 

announcing

 

required

 

instant

 

States

 

interpose

 

exercising

 

Whether

 

questions

 

general


consent
 

Persons

 

person

 

question

 

believed

 

submitted

 

appears

 

submit

 

trifling

 

rights