judges. The result of these deliberations is found in two volumes, — " Dudley's Reports " and " Georgia Decisions." None of the reports mentioned are, strictly speaking, "authority " in Georgia. They are seldom cited, and the books themselves are not generally found in the library of the Georgia lawyer. Most of them have been bought up by the travelling law-book agents to be sold to libraries that " want everything extant." In cases involving the construction of early Georgia statutes, they have great weight by virtue of the maxim, Contemporanea expositio, etc.

After earnest and long-continued exertions by the leading minds of the State, combating a strong popular prejudice, the Supreme Court was organized in 1845. Its jurisdiction is not limited as to amount. The most trivial controversies in the courts of pie potidre make grist for its mill. It has adjudicated a squabble over a canary-bird; and through the medium of certiorari cases the court is the regulator of the gyrations and contortions of that drum-major of the law, the justice of the peace.

The first judges of the Supreme Court were Eugenius A. Nisbet, Joseph Henry Lumpkin, and Hiram Warner, — a noble triumvirate. The latter reigned in 1853, and his place was filled by Ebenczer Starnes. Judge Nisbet was succeeded in the same year by Henry L. Benning. In 1855 Charles J. McDonald took the place of Judge Starnes, and in 1859 he resigned, and Linton Stephens became a member of the court. Judge Benning left the judicial for military service in 1860, and his seat was filled by Richard F. Lyon. In 1861 Charles J. Jenkins went on the bench, and remained until 1866, when he was succeeded by Iverson L. Harris. In the same year Dawson A. Walker filled the vacancy created by Judge Lyon's retirement. In 1867, upon the death of Lumpkin, Warner was appointed Chief-Justice. Reconstruction supervened, and in 1869, under a new Constitution, the Governor appointed Joseph E. Brown Chief-Justice, and Henry Kent McCay and Hiram Warner, Judges. The former resigned in December, 1870, and Osborne A. Lochrane was appointed. He resigned in 1872, and Warner became Chief-Justice, his place as Judge being filled by W. W. Montgomery, who in turn was succeeded by Robert P. Trippe, in February, 1873. In 1875 Judges McCay and Trippe resigned, and Logan E. Bleckley and James Jackson went on the bench. In 1880 the latter, upon the resignation of Warner, be came Chief-Justice, and the vacant seat was filled by appointment of Willis A. Hawkins. In 1880 Judge Bleckley resigned, and was succeeded by Martin J. Crawford; and Judge Hawkins's place (he not being a candidate for election) was supplied by Alexander M. Speer. In 1882 Samuel Hall succeeded Judge Speer, and in 1883, upon the death of Judge Hall, Mark H. Blandford became a member of the court. On the death of Jackson in 1877, Bleckley was made Chief-Justice; and in 1887, upon the death of Judge Crawford, Thomas J. Simmons was elected. In January, 1891, Judge Blandford was succeeded by Samuel Lumpkin; so that the court as now constituted consists of Chief-Justice Bleckley, and Justices Simmons and Lumpkin.

These are the "dry-as-dust details" of the judicial record. Yet how inspiring is the fact that in this long record there is not one unworthy name! Without exception, each has possessed ability for his station. Not one was ever suspected of corruption or corruptibility. The glorious significance of facts like these is too often ignored, as men forget to thank God for the sunshine.

During the period covered in the foregoing enumeration the methods of selection have several times varied from that of appointment by the Governor to that of election by the Legislature. The third method of popular vote has never been tried; so that we have never had a judge who, in the words