He had hoped to have the post of Solicitor General, and accepted the judicial office with some reluctance, not realizing that he had been set upon the path that would lead him to the highest honor open to a member of his profession.

"During the last forty-five years those appointed United States District Judges have averaged forty-nine years of age when appointed. Judge Sanford was fortythree when he became a District Judge. His case is an example of the gain to the judicial service in appointing to the lower federal courts comparatively young men, of character and education, through the opportunities for distinguished judicial careers thus opened up to them.

"His service as a trial judge was one of exacting labor, rendered more than usually arduous by a temperament which demanded that every case be given the most careful and painstaking consideration regardless of its material importance. While at the bar he had shown a marked preference for practice before appellate courts, the quick and undeliberated decisions necessary in trial work being repugnant to his scholarly and rather cautious nature. For the same reason his duties as a District Judge were not entirely congenial to him, since he was constantly faced with the necessity of passing immediately upon questions to which he would have preferred to give more mature consideration.

"Nevertheless, his preferences in no way influenced his achievements, and his record was an enviable one. The high regard in which he was held by those with whom. he was associated was made evident by the spontaneous outburst of approval with which they responded to the proposal that he be elevated to the Supreme Court. When the retirement of Mr. Justice Pitney, on December 31, 1922, created a vacancy, the Senate of the State of Tennessee adopted a resolution urging that Judge Sanford be considered for the position, and the overwhelming indorsement then given him by the people from his sec

tion of the country, coupled with the desire which had always been his to become a member of an appellate tribunal, must have made his selection for the supreme bench doubly gratifying to him.

"During the seven years of his service as a Justice of the Supreme Court he delivered the opinion of the Court in 130 cases. These opinions, which are to be found in volumes 261 to 281, inclusive, of the Reports, disclose his scholarly training. In addition to his technical equipment he had that culture and breadth of vision so valuable in high judicial office. His professional learning was supplemented by an intimate familiarity with literature, which gave to his judicial opinions an unusual clarity and attractive style. Endowed by nature with the rare gift of felicitous expression, which he used to such good advantage at the bar, he could not be satisfied with a judicial utterance until it had been subjected to careful scrutiny to the end that the exposition of his views and the process of reasoning upon which they were founded might be full and lucid. His judicial labors were characterized by patient and conscientious deliberation upon every aspect of the case in hand. Fidelity to duty was ever his chief concern.

"His judicial opinions cover most of the branches of the law with which this Court is called upon to deal. Those in the Pocket Veto Case in the 279th, and in the Gitlow and Fiske cases in the 268th and 274th, which dealt with the constitutional validity of state statutes defining criminal anarchy, are examples of the excellence of his judicial work.

"All of his writings indicate a marked adherence to the principles on which our Constitution is based, coupled with an appreciation of the need of adjusting the application of those principles to fit the requirements of changing conditions. Conservative in judgment and strict in his adherence to tested doctrines, he was one of that great body of jurists who have maintained the stability of the common-law system of jurisprudence.

"No tribute to Justice Sanford, however brief, would be complete which touched only upon his professional achievements. His early studies, supplemented by foreign travel, bred in him an enduring-appreciation of music, literature, and the fine arts. He was in every sense a man of the highest culture. His mastery of the English language and his training in the field of advocacy combined to make him a speaker of unusual ability and charm. But above all, his dominant traits of character were kindliness and affection for his fellow men. His interests in the fields of education and charity were many. The joys of friendship were his constant and supreme delight.

"The widespread grief occasioned by his death was intensified by the fact that, only sixty-four years of age, his faculties matured by long experience and untiring industry, he appeared to have many years of useful service before him. The Nation has lost an able, high-minded judge, and many of us a gracious friend. Of him it may fittingly be said, as Campbell said of Lord Holt, 'Perhaps the excellence which he attained may be traced to the passion for justice by which he was constantly actuated.''

The CHIEF JUSTICE responded:

Mr. Attorney General: The Court receives with deep gratification this tribute from the bar to the service of an able and faithful member of this Court, who was taken from us, with tragic suddenness, in the midst of his career.

The strength of the Court is the resultant of the interaction and coöperation of individual forces, and the successful performance of its function depends upon the discharge of individual responsibility by Justices of equal authority in the decision of all matters that come before the Court. It has recruited its strength both from the bar and from the bench, and the contributions made to the jurisprudence of the Court by those whose judgment has been ripened by the responsibilities of administration in state and federal courts has been a conspicuous feature of its history.

"Mr. Justice Sanford had the advantage not only of careful preparation for the bar under the most exacting and stimulating teachers of the law, and of valuable experience in practice, but of many years of service as a District Judge of the United States. It was the distinguished success with which he met that long-continued test that led to his appointment to this bench. He came here as a graduate of the hard school of judicial experience, and he brought with him an intimate and precise knowledge of the problems of the federal courts. Never sacrificing the dignity, impartiality and authority of his office as a District Judge to any desire for public favor, his ability and fidelity commanded their appropriate and gratifying reward in the esteem and confidence of the comunity that he served, so that the bar and the legislature of the State of Tennessee gave to the proposal of his appointment to this Court a unanimous endorsement. It was pre-eminently his judicial quality which won this general esteem. Without eccentricity, affectation or irritation, but with simplicity, candor, patience and thoroughness, he had applied himself to every judicial task, whether agreeable or irksome, and the applause which greeted the conduct of his office was a tribute to the standards of the community as well as to his own.

"In the District Court, Judge Sanford carried a heavy burden of criminal cases and, as exemplifying his dominant traits, I may quote what has been said by an eminent member of the bar who had long observed his manner of discharging this duty: 'In the administration of the criminal laws he was judge and not prosecutor. The government was only a litigant in his court suing for justice. It stood on a parity with the humblest citizen it accused. The constitution and laws of his country were to be obeyed, and not evaded, by judge, government and accused alike.' Especially prominent in every activity was his unfailing courtesy and grace. Never lacking this quality himself, he looked for it in others, and in the District Court under his guidance there was afforded a notable

illustration of the commendable restraint and propriety in speech which heighten rather than impair the effectiveness of forensic efforts.

"In addition to sound technical training as a lawyer and broad experience as a judge, Mr. Justice Sanford had resources of culture, developed by travel and liberal studies both here and abroad. He was interested in literature, music and art, and those who enjoyed companionship with him were not disappointed because of limitations in his horizon. While the learning of the law was his supreme interest, it neither monopolized nor narrowed him. He was happy in his public addresses and brought to many important meetings the charm of eloquence. The members of the bar cannot fail to remember with especial pleasure his address in London at the Lord Mayor's dinner at Guild Hall on the occasion of the visit, in 1924, of the representatives of the American Bar Association, and his graceful response to the welcome of the French bench and bar in the Palais de Justice in Paris. The lawyers and judges of France had the unusual and welcome opportunity of listening to an eminent member of the American judiciary paying a beautiful tribute in their own tongue to their achievements and aspirations.

"You have alluded, Mr. Attorney General, to the important opinions delivered for this Court by Mr. Justice Sanford, and, as illustrating the quality of his work, you have referred in particular to the Pocket Veto Case, 279 U. S. 655, relating to the authority of the President, and also to the cases in which Mr. Justice Sanford dealt in clear and definite utterance with the power of the State as affecting freedom of speech, upholding the necessary authority to punish abuses of that freedom (Gitlow v. New York, 268 U. S. 652; Whitney v. California, 274 U. S. 357) while also sustaining the constitutional limitations which safeguard the liberty of the citizen (Fiske v. Kansas, 274 U. S. 380). In his work in the District Court, Mr. Justice Sanford had given special attention to the difficult problems arising in the administration of the bankruptcy