phy. It was a set of principles which has been given. frequent expression in American Constitutional history. It calls for strict construction of constitutionally granted powers, vigorous defense of States' rights, and for narrow confinement of governmental interference with individual freedom of action. Mr. Justice McReynolds brought to his judicial labors a deep conviction that the structure of this nation had been built on strong foundations. He believed that it was in the functioning of the judicial process that those foundations could best be preserved and strengthened; and upon that process he based his greatest hopes for our future welfare. He also believed. as he once remarked, that the power of this Court "does not lie in the army, it does not lie in the navy, nor in the militia; it lies in the faith of the people for whom it was created. . . ." For over twenty-six years Mr. Justice McReynolds consistently applied these principles with zeal, ability, and diligence, and with a conviction and intensity which could not brook compromise. "Constitutional guarantees," he wrote upon one occasion, “were intended to be immutable essences within our character . . . Certain fundamentals have been put beyond experimentation." But, in his view, the function. of the judge is not that of a mere automaton. Thus, in his dissent in Berger v. United States, 255 U. S. 22, 43, he remarked: "And while 'an overspeaking judge is no well-tuned cymbal' neither is an amorphous dummy unspotted by human emotions a becoming receptacle for judicial power." During his long tenure upon the bench, Mr. Justice McReynolds expressed his views, both in majority and dissent, in a great number of cases presenting the immense variety of problems which come before this Court. His opinions reveal a conscious and continuing effort to decide no more than required by the issues of the particular case before him. His writing shows little taste for epigram. His literary style, characteristic of the man, was terse, direct, and clear, yet capable of translating to the reader the conviction and fervor with which his views were expressed. He wrote during a period when the integration of our society through a developing industrialism and the rapid growth of transportation and communication necessitated adjustments between the roles of the federal and state governments; but he never lost sight of the place of the States in the American governmental system. He appreciated the importance of private property in our economy and recognized that the maintenance of law and order is fundamental to the national welfare. The expression that his opinions give to those views reinforces the basic constitutional theories that governed his decisions. Mr. Justice McReynolds was a man of broad intellectual interests. He was a generous host, and greatly enjoyed the company of his friends. The welfare of children was a matter of genuine concern to him. Upon his retirement from the Court, he "adopted" and supported thirty-three British children whose homes had been destroyed by the bombings of London. His interest in these innocent victims of war was personal and profound. He gave a further practical manifestation of his concern by offering to contribute the first $10,000 to a $10,000,000 Save the Children Fund. His will contained numerous bequests to charities dedicated to child welfare and to others concerned with the care of the weak and the helpless. Throughout his life, Mr. Justice McReynolds was interested in the education of young people. His will contained several substantial gifts to institutions providing legal education, reflecting an interest derived from his long career as teacher of law, practitioner, and judge. But he was concerned, not only with professional training, but also with the problems of general education. Thus his will contained bequests to liberal arts colleges such as Centre College at Danville, Kentucky, an institution which he loved, though of which he was not an alumnus. Above all, Mr. Justice McReynolds was a man of sincerity and independence. His views on the controversial issues of his time were, to him, matters of vital moral conviction. In their defense, he dedicated the full resources of his spirit and character. It is not surprising that his views evoked strong response, both in support and opposition. But even those of a different philosophy found much to admire in his absolute integrity and his rugged forthrightness. Complete conformity in thought and opinion has never been considered a virtue in this Republic. It is a basic tenet of our political doctrine that out of the clash of opposing views we are most likely to approach truth. So long as that is our faith, we will pay tribute to the memory of a man who never deviated from the path of principles which to him were fundamental to the nation's welfare. THE CHIEF JUSTICE directed that the resolutions be spread upon the minutes of the Court. TABLE OF CASES REPORTED Aaron, Bay Ridge Operating Co. v. Ackermann v. O'Rourke.. Adamson, In re.. Administrator. See name of administrator; Tem porary Controls Administrator. Page 446 858 834 Aetna Portland Cement Co., Trade Comm'n v.. 839 Alexander Wool Combing Co. v. United States...... 742 Alker v. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. 827, 862 Allen v. Burford.. Alliance of Stage Employees, Schatte v. Amer v. Superior Court of California.. American Barge Line Co., Montgomery v. .. 830 812 131 813 859 859 Arkansas Oak Flooring Co. v. Louisiana & A. R. Co.. 828 |