« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
civil war. That the prevailing forces should be on the side of union and freedom was due in large measure to his teaching; and to-day, as citizens of a country possessing a government adequate to the preservation of its integrity at home and its honor abroad, and to the security of its citizens in all their rights, we may forget the differences which separated the founders of our institutions, and recognize the good done by them all, and especially by that group of statesmen which Virginia contributed to the country: Patrick Henry, whose eloquence incited to revolt; Thomas Jefferson, whose masterly pen placed before the world in such impressive phrase the Declaration of Independence; Washington, whose unfaltering courage sustained the struggle to make that Declaration a fact; Madison, whose wisdom and moderation framed a Constitution which could reconcile the diverse opinions of the convention; and last, but not least, John Marshall, whose work as Chief Justice perfected and preserved for future generations the accomplishments and achievements of his compatriots.
A celebration was held in Sioux City, Iowa, by the Bar Association of that city, at a banquet held at the Mondamin Hotel. The minute entered on the records of the Association, quoted below, gives the details of the exercises:
“The second annual banquet of the Bar Association of Sioux City was held at the Mondamin Hotel in Sioux City, Iowa, February 4, 1901, in commemoration of John Marshall Day. After the banquet, a programme of toasts and responses was opened by the President, Mr. Craig L. Wright, who acted as toast
master. The toast, John
Marshall, his Early Life and Military Service,' was responded to by Hon. George W. Wakefield. Mr. Leonard B. Robinson spoke on 'John Marshall, the Lawyer and Statesman,' and Mr. D. C. Shull on 'John Marshall, the Jurist.' Mr. Edwin J. Stason discussed John Marshall, the Man and Author,' and the exercises concluded with the singing of ' America' by the entire assemblage.”
A celebration was also held at the Upper Iowa University, Fayette, Iowa, and an address delivered by Maurice Raymond Carter, of Bailey, before the faculty, students and citizens.
Appropriate proceedings to celebrate Marshall Day were had in the United States Circuit Court at St. Louis, in the State Circuit Court, and at the St. Louis Law School, concluding with a banquet at the Southern Hotel in the evening. The exercises were had under the auspices of the Bar Association of St. Louis, which appointed the following committee to arrange for the celebration: Amos M. Thayer, Elmer B. Adams, D. D. Fisher, Horatio D. Wood and Jacob Klein.
PROCEEDINGS IN UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT.
Pursuant to the recommendations of the committee of the Bar Association of St. Louis, at the opening hour of the United States Circuit Court for the Eastern Division of the Eastern District of Missouri, sitting in St. Louis, February 4, 1901, there were present llenry C. Caldwell, Walter H. Sanborn and Amos M. Thayer, Circuit Judges of the Eighth Circuit (Judge Caldwell presiding), and Elmer B. Adams, United States District Judge. Henry S. Priest, former United States District Judge for the
1 The proceedings were afterwards published by the Bar Association of St. Louis, embellished with an engraving of the Inman portrait of Marshall, under the following title: “John Marshall Day' proceedings of the Bench and Bar of St. Louis. Celebrating the Centennial Anniversary of the Accession to the Supreme Court of the United States of Chief Justice John Marshall. February 4, 18011901. Published by the Bar Association of St. Louis."
Eastern District of Missouri, having been designated to move an adjournment of the court in conformity with the recommendations of the committee, presented such motion and addressed the court in the following language:
Address of Henry S. Priest. One hundred years ago to-day John Marshall of Virginia became Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Considering the condition of the nation then, reviewing the events since, and, in the light of these, contemplating the possibilities of the future, and remembering what a potent influence he wielded in shaping its course, we should be constrained by feelings of unfeigned gratitude to venerate his memory and do honor to his name.
He will ever live in the hearts and affections of this great nation, an example of the most accomplished jurist and devoted patriot. He had served in many fields with distinction and with advantage to the public welfare before being called to preside as the chief magistrate of the Supreme Court, but it was in this office that his great genius found those profound questions of political and juridical philosophy that were worthy to engage its fullest capacity. Nature had given him an extraordinary mind, and by energetic study, research and contemplation he vastly improved upon the gifts of nature. His intellect was massive, clear and penetrative. It was disciplined to honest thought and courageous expression. He sought truth by all the methods of true philosophy, and worshiped as an idolater at the shrine of his country and his countrymen. Patriotism, with him, was not a mere rapturous sentiment, but a moral principle ever delight
ing him to do and advocate that which reason instructed him was the best for the happiness and prosperity of his country.
Marshall perceived in the Constitution an animated thing conceived to respond and capable of responding to the high purposes and ambitions of the people of the nation, and be made the Supreme Court its living voice. He discerned the “ theoretical excellence of the government, the attainable prosperity and power of the States united, the magnificence of the national life which would spring from the Union, and the unbounded physical resources which stood ready to nourish its strength.” In the spirit of these views he went forward expounding the Constitution, never transcending its letter or offending its spirit. Jefferson did not discover in it the power to acquire new territory by purchase, and determined to usurp it. Marshall demonstrated its existence and acquitted Jefferson's conduct of offense. He dared not usurp power — he did not shrink from duty.
In the grandeur of our united country, in the supremacy of law, in the harmony of governments which con. stitute the nation, and in a well regulated liberty, we discern the vindication of his courage and his penetrating genius.
For thirty-four years, with hostile executive and legislative departments, save an intermission of one administration, his masterful genius controlled and influenced the course of the judiciary. At the time he ascended the bench the court was without that prestige which its place in the trinity of governmental powers entitled it to enjoy. Its decisions had been few and not widely disseminated. Jay had just previously been offered the place for the second time. In declining the tender of ap