"Our custodians of the remedy in the laws," he says, “discovered a microscopic technical point.”—[Ibid.]

*

"That the Supreme Court has ‘uniformly refused to consider' the erroneous rulings of trial courts, merely because of some stupid mistake of form, and which could not affect the justice, substance or merits of the case, is an official declaration of impotency, the boldness of which is exceeded only by its unjustness."-[Ibid.]

"These cases illustrate the deplorable uncertainty that exists in one distinct department of our State government. From them it appears that if any legislative act is submitted to the hired men of the judiciary for review, it may be strictly construed to produce one result; it may be liberally construed to produce something else;" &c.—[p. 8.]

*

"It should be remembered that in almost every case in which aldermanic jobbery for railroads has been submitted to the Supreme Court for review, that jobbery has been consummated only by legal quibbles and unjust technicalities through the aid of the judicial department of the State."-[p. 11.]

"These jugglers of legal technics have done more to unsettle confidence in the laws, breed contempt for courts and create fears that the supposed protection of law was inadequate, than the wild harangues of socialists. Bomb throwers and riotous strikers, without wealth, influence or intelligence, may be promptly dealt with; but wealthy conspirators and criminals with unlimited influence and unbounded cheek, aided by this juggling with the law by friendly courts, march onward triumphant and unrestrained."-[p. 13.]

*

"Governments are not corrupted by socialism and anarchy; it is the corruption of the government by monied conspirators and unreliable courts which begets the socialist.”—[Ibid.]

Such is the language used and such are the charges made by Mr. Bonney against the Supreme Court of Illinois. And upon what grounds? It may be well to glance at one or two of the decisions which are so outrageous in Mr. Bonney's eyes. For instance, take the case of Martin v. Foulke, 114 Ill. Rep.

The Supreme Court, in that case, simply held that they would not consider an error which did not relate to the pleadings or appear on the face of the judgment unless it had been excepted to in the court below, and the exception embodied in the Bill of Exceptions. This Mr. Bonney looks upon as the quintessence of injustice, based upon a technicality. But it is no technicality at all. It is a rule of practice, resting upon sound reason. For, if the decision is excepted to in the Court below, the Court, being notified that the ruling is to be relied upon as erroneous, may examine the law or reflect upon the matter more carefully, and perhaps change his opinion. Whereas, on the other hand, he has a right to look

upon the failure to except as an acquiescence in the justness and correctness of his ruling. And yet for adhering to this uniform and correct rule of practice the Supreme Court is charged with " perverting" their abilities "to the useless solution of such technical objections or exceptions as may be discovered by sharp lawyers." Upon the strength of such a decision he charges that "the hired men of the judicial department care little for right, justice or merit."

Another instance will be given to illustrate the degree of fairness which is exhibited by the author in reviewing those decisions of the Supreme Court which fall under his special censure.

One case which he places under discussion and criticism is, McCartney Attorney General, v. Chicago & Evanston R. R. Co., 112 Ill., 611.

After reciting various provisions of the Constitution of 1870, he says: "Now let me use a few illustrations of the manner in which the hired men of the judicial department have failed to apply these commandments," &c.

"At the time this constitution went into effect the Chicago & Evanston Railroad Company was existing, under a special charter passed in 1861 and amended in 1865, and was at that time entitled to operate its cars 'with animal power only."

Here the statement is made in such a way as leaves upon the mind of the reader the unavoidable inference that it was by the charter of 1861 or by the amendment of 1865, that the company was limited to animal power only. But it was neither the one nor the other. It was an ordinance passed by the City of Chicago, in 1864, which, as construed by the Company in accepting it, placed this limitation upon the Company. This difference is a material and vital one; so much so as to cause all the subsequent criticism to fall harmless to the ground.

Having thus laid the foundation for his censure, Mr. Bonney says:

"In 1883 the Common Council passed an ordinance authorizing this horse-car corporation to conduct all general business incident to railroads, by freight, passenger and other cars, or by steam or other power.' "The constitutonality of this ordinance was presented to the Supreme Court, (112 Ill. 611), but what was the result? The majority opinion mildly dismisses this important constitutional question without discussion and by this feeble remark: We cannot say that the charter of this company was not in operation at the time of the adoption of the constitution ot 1870.”

Here the same idea is held out. The Company is called "this horse-car corporation," and the reader is given to understand that the question was raised, whether the ordinance of 1883 was not unconstitutional, inasmuch

as it authorized the use of steam, contrary to the charter; the charter having been granted previous to the constitution of 1870. But that question was not before the court, simply because, contrary to what the author would have the reader infer, the use of steam was authorized by the original charter, which authorized the Company to "operate a railroad, with horse-power or locomotive cars." Nor was any such point made by counsel. The validity of the ordinance was contested, but not on that ground.

From the want of any justification or excuse in the decisions referred to for the use of such violent and revolutionary language, it would naturally be suspected that there existed some other motive in the author's mind than the desire to make a fair or just criticism. And it does not take a very close examination to discover what that motive is to discover that this is a political rather than a judicial publication-that the object is to render the present occupants of the Supreme Bench odious and unpopular, so as to make room for others in their place. From the following it will be seen that this object is not even concealed.

"There are seven justices of this court. The terms of five of them expire in June, 1888. The five that are elected at that time will constitute one more than is necessary to every decision. That majority will, in the succeeding nine years, have more control over the application of the fundamental principles of our State government than all the governors, senators and representatives who will hold office during the same length of time, as it may, by artful construction, fritter away the effect and intent of all executive and legislative acts, or even abolish the Constitution itself. The dangerous monopolies, conspiracies and pools which now threaten the safety of the nation well understand the importance of continuing judges in office who sympathize with their interests, and a desperate effort will quietly but surely be made by em to pack the Supreme Bench. Between now and the time of that important election, the common people will have abundant opportunity to fully examine the records of the court for the past nine years. It may be that life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness will be promoted by a clean sweep and a new deal," &c.

The political character of the pamphlet having been thus fully disclosed, it might have been passed by as a harmless piece of demagogism, had it not been published by a member of the bar, and issued from a respectable law office of this city. That fact makes it pertinent to inquire how far the members of the bar approve of such publications.

The author of the one in question is an officer of the court which he has thus maligned. If any other sort of officer had used the same language, he probably would not long maintain his official position.

Monday, June 1, 1885, I started from Euston Station for Belfast, by the way of Fleetwood. The country from London northwestwardly, on this route, was rather pretty-quite similar to that between Dover and London. It is open and destitute of large timber, though there are a number of groves, and a good many scattering, small trees.

There are many indications of large estates, but the farms in this region were somewhat broken into smaller holdings. Hedge fences most of the way-sometimes stone. Occasionally a few rails, but quite rarely. The houses are brick. Though there are more farm houses than on the Dover road, yet the people here, also, seem to be living mostly in cities and villages. Thatched roofs begin to appear in central England. At 7 P. M. came to Preston, and an hour later arrived at Fleetwood. Here we took the steamer for Belfast, where we arrived at an early hour the next morning.

As I walked up the streets of Belfast, there was a singular appearance to the brick houses on either side of the street, which I could not account for until I noticed that the front doors all came down to the street; there being no platforms or front steps, and no basements.

9-30 A. M., started on the train for Port Rush. Passed through a handsome country. The land is more cut up into small fields than that of any country I had passed through in Europe. The farmers pay, for the use of the land, from 10s. an acre upward, running as high as £4, near the large towns. The people raise potatoes, corn, hay and flax. Fences are of stone. and hedge. The houses, of stone, plastered, with thatched roofs. I have yet to see a wooden building in England or Ireland. In several places people were engaged cutting and preparing peat.

There is no doubt that the land legislation of the British Parliament has been of great benefit to Ireland. An Irishman in the car said he had a lease of about 6 acres which had yet some 20 years to run. He was paying £11-15s. per annum for the 6 acres. But the valuation placed upon it by the Commissioners was £7-10s., which was about what he would get it at, if there were no lease. 'Parliament did not, however, interfere with existing leases.

Port Rush is but eight miles from the Causeway. Here we took an electric tramway to Bush, six miles, and then an open carriage or wagon, for the remaining two miles. This was said to be the longest electric tramway in the world.

THE GIANT'S CAUSEWAY.

This, as is well known, is on the extreme north coast of Ireland, in the county of Antrim. The coast here is high and rocky, for some thirty miles. About sixteen miles of it abounds in a formation similar to that at the Causeway, consisting of jointed pillars or columns, closely wedged together.

Leaving the hotel, and going down to the sea shore with the guide, we got into the boats and visited two caves, and then the Causeway. The caves were interesting, but there are many caves, while there is but one Causeway. The landlord had said that the Causeway could not be visited to advantage, without the boats; which was simply a falsehood. The caves have nothing to do with the Causeway, and before visiting that, the boats are discarded entirely. The first cave is called Port Coon. It is 350 feet long, 45 feet high, and 20 feet wide at the entrance. After passing the entrance, one of the party fired off a pistol, which made a most astonishing sound, the noise reverberating in all directions. Water 14 feet deep. The other cave is larger, and. 90 feet high.

There are various objects which the guide points out; the Giant's Organ, with the pipes in front, 45 feet high, 60 or 70 of them-the Giant's Well, the Giant's Grandmother sitting on a stool, the Giant's Saddle, the Black Bear, the Camel, etc., etc., these all being rocks resemong those things. The well was a real well.

The Causeway itself consists of a tongue of land extending into the sea, which, at a distance, presents no unusual appearance. But upon reaching it, it is found to consist of an immense number of volcanic columns or pillars, resembling timbers driven into the ground, and wedged close together for a foundation for a pier or other structure. These are quite uniform in size and in shape, vertically, and are of a regular mathematical form, having from 3 to 9 sides. Most of them have 5, 6, or 7 sides. They average in size from 16 to 18 inches across, some being smaller, and others somewhat larger, but scarcely any being more than 20 inches.

These columns rise above each other various distances, ranging all the way from one inch to four feet. A large number of them, nearest the sea, rise in regular succession, as you go on land, but so gradually as to form a complete floor over which you can walk. You may proceed along on the