Joel Parker he was nominated an Associate Justice to fill the vacancy caused by Judge Parker's death. He took his seat at the February term, 1888, but seems to have taken no active part in the rendering of opinions until the June term of that year. He read several decisions at that term, some in quite important causes. From that time until the present he has had his full share of the labors of the courts to which he is attached. His circuit is a large and impor tant one, involving a laborious life for a judge who, like Justice Garrison, is conscientious in the discharge of his duty. It is composed of the three counties of Burlington, Camden, and Gloucester. Judge Garrison is an excellent trial judge, and presides at the several circuits with great ability and to the acceptability of the bar and of suitors. He has had in his short term of office some most important murder trials, one of which is most mysterious, and where the murderer is still undiscovered. These cases have given full opportunity of testing the Judge's power to grapple with some of the most intricate questions of crim inal law. He has shown himself fully able to meet any supposable exigency which may arise. Judge Garrison is an independent thinker, and does not fail, whenever his mind reaches a conclusion in opposition to the rest of the court, freely to express his opinion. He has stood alone in his views more than once, and has strongly and vigorously put himself upon the record. The cases of Collins vs. Voorhees and of Bannister vs. Jackson, recently decided in the Court ■ of Errors, are specimens of his mode of reasoning. The Voorhees case involved a question of legitimacy of children born from a marriage
contracted during the lifetime of a former wife divorced by a fraudulent proceeding; that of Bannister raised the question of tes tamentary capacity. Some very good lawyers are inclined to agree with the Judge's views in each case. Judge Garrison has an alert mind, an in cisive method of diction, a strong, vigorous manner of expressing his views, and is a very valuable addition to the courts. He is not contented with the mere study of the abstract principles of law, but strengthens his mental capacity and enlarges his intellectual vision by general reading of the highest and best kind of literature. A few curious facts connected with the personnel of the Justices of the Supreme Court are worth noticing. Every Chief-Jus tice since the Revolution, with one excep tion, — the present incumbent, — has been a Presbyterian. The very great majority of the Associate Justices have also been Pres byterians, and many of them Elders in their churches. Nearly all who were educated at colleges, graduated at Princeton. There have been very few small men, physically, among them. Chief-Justice Hornblower was a small, delicate, slender man; with that exception all have been of good size, well proportioned, strong, and vigorous; and all have been in the full possession of their bodily faculties, none have been lame or halt or blind or deaf. Above all, not one has fallen from his high es tate by moral derelictions, but each has sus tained a high standard of morality, not only by requiring it in others, but by obeying the laws of the highest integrity. It is not as tonishing that with such men the character of the judiciary of New Jersey has stood so high, and that it has achieved so much for good order, justice, and virtue.
