细节
TAFT, William H. Typed letter signed ("Wm. H. Taft"), as former President, to Charles G. Washburn (1857-1928), New Haven 6 May 1920. 1 page, 4to, personal stationery.
A FUTURE CHIEF JUSTICE DECRIES A SUPREME COURT RULING: "A MORE UNSATISFACTORY OPINION I NEVER READ." "I read McKenna's opinion [in U. S. v. United States Steel Corp.]," Taft says, "and a more unsatisfactory opinion I have never read...He has made the Steel Company an exceptional case and not one furnishing any basis for authority for future action. His attitude is a little bit like that which [Peter Finley Dunne's character] Dooley attributed to [Justice] Brown in the insular cases...'Four of the Judges say the Constitution do follow the flag, and four of the Justices say it do not follow the flag.' Brown says 'Sometimes it do follow the flag and sometimes it don't, but I am the lad to tell you when it do and when it don't.'" Taft sees the same result in McKenna's ruling on corporate monopolies, forcing judges to distinguish between "good" monopolies or "bad" ones on a case-by-case basis.
A FUTURE CHIEF JUSTICE DECRIES A SUPREME COURT RULING: "A MORE UNSATISFACTORY OPINION I NEVER READ." "I read McKenna's opinion [in U. S. v. United States Steel Corp.]," Taft says, "and a more unsatisfactory opinion I have never read...He has made the Steel Company an exceptional case and not one furnishing any basis for authority for future action. His attitude is a little bit like that which [Peter Finley Dunne's character] Dooley attributed to [Justice] Brown in the insular cases...'Four of the Judges say the Constitution do follow the flag, and four of the Justices say it do not follow the flag.' Brown says 'Sometimes it do follow the flag and sometimes it don't, but I am the lad to tell you when it do and when it don't.'" Taft sees the same result in McKenna's ruling on corporate monopolies, forcing judges to distinguish between "good" monopolies or "bad" ones on a case-by-case basis.