Unit-1 (Prose)

Lesson-13
“High Court of Justice of The Irish Free State
Lynch v. Fitzgerald and others” (1938)
• Prose work - description of the case Lynch V. Fitzgerald & Others - in Ireland’s
High Court in 1938.
• A boy - killed by the detective service agents repressing (or blocking) an
attempt to disrupt (or interrupt)a cattle sale in Cork.
• The trial took place in the court of Justice Hanna.
• The Sheriff of Cork seized – Cattle- a warrant from the Irish Land
Commission- attempted to sell -a force about 200 Guards- 12 armed detectives
-outside the yard- 40 Guards including 10 ordinary detectives - inside the place
of sale.
• The security- Marsh’s Yard in Copley Street, Cork - a threatened
demonstration against the sale
• Only the prospective buyers - to take part in the sales.
• An hour before for the sale- about 1500 people had collected in Anglesea
Street -the main street into which Copley Street opened.
• By the time, a lorry filled with men carrying sticks came through the crowd
in Anglesea Street, turned into Copley Street.
• It was driven - several barriers of the Guards - crashed into the gates of the
yard.
• After a few moments, the crowd outside the yard was held in check with
the exception of one or two.
• Immediately, the three detectives of the Special Branch of the Civic Guards-
Moore, Condon, and Rodgers opened fire- killed Lynch, who had followed
the lorry.
• The father of killed boy filed a case-three detectives- the fourth defendant-
Mr. Fitzgerald, the Chief Superintendent of Civic Guards -he claimed
damages under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1846.
• Justice Hanna expressed his views-there is no case or authority-an
uncontrolled body of men- employment of the State left to use their firearms
at their own discretion.
• Mentioned Curwood’s Hawkins’ Pleas of the Crown in which the regulation of
firearms was given.
• The justice -the three defendants did not follow the instructions issued to the
Civic Guards on the use of firearms, dated November 24th, 1932, copies of
which the Chief Commissioner had sent for the use of the Court.
• The justice said - armed forces could use firearms only against an unlawful or
riotous assembly.
• The defendants was not so-violated the law. The Justice came to the conclusion -
the shot was done not to protect lives of buyers- completely was an unjustifiable
act.
• Justice imposed a damage of 300 Pounds-under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1846
and ordered for the criminal liability
 Unit-1 (Prose)
Lesson-14
Opinion and dissenting opinion
In
Repouille v. United States
By
Judge learned hand & Judge Jerome Frank

• The prose work “Opinion and Dissenting Opinion in Repouille V. United

States” is the description of the opinions- by two Circuit Judges namely –
• Judge Learned Hand & Judge Jerome Frank in the Circuit Court of Appeals on
05th December, 1947.
 The case
• Louis Loftus Repouille- a refuge applied for citizenship on September 22, 1944 at The
Immigration and Naturalization Service of USA.
• Rejected - Repouille filed a petition to The District Court.
• The Immigration and Naturalization Service -the objection- he had put to death his son,
a boy of thirteen by means of Chloroform 12th October 1939 - did not show himself -a
person of “good moral character” for five years which preceded the filing of his
petition.
• Finally, The District Court-ordered- to sanction the citizenship.
• The District Attorney filed an appeal at Circuit Court of Appeals- two
Circuit Judges namely- Learned Hand & Judge Jerome Frank on 05th
December, 1947 (the 2nd Circuit appeal) dismissed the petition of
Repouille for the citizenship.
• Though the case was dismissed, the two judges -Learned Hand &
Judge Jerome Frank had opinion and dissenting opinion in the case
• The essay illustrating the two perceptions of the judges
 The Opinion- The Judge Learned Hand
• The District Attorney, on behalf of the Immigration and Naturalization Service,
appealed from an order naturalizing the appellee
• The ground of the objection -Repouille did not show himself to have been a person of
“good moral character” for five years which preceded the filing of his petition.
• On 12th October 1939, he had deliberately put to death his son, a boy of thirteen by
means of Chloroform.
• The said reason -the child had suffered from birth from a brain injury which destined
him to be an idiot and a physical monstrosity malformed in all four limbs.
• The child was blind, mute, and deformed.
• Repouille had other four children at that time and having responsibility of caring the
burden of fifth.
• Initially-charged for manslaughter (murderer) in the first degree and because of
clemency, the judge brought in a verdict of manslaughter in the second degree.
• Sentenced him - not less than five years not more than ten years.
• The execution of the judgement to be stayed and the defendant to be placed on
Probation, from which he was discharged in Dec,1945.
• He conducted himself as a person of “good moral character” during the five
years before he filed his petition.
• The Judge said that “good moral character” in the Nationality Act was like
a test which was very similar to a Gallup Poll.
• The killing of child was not deliberate but the moral standards-be applied
He compared this case with - in Massachusetts -not executed but imprisoned
for life imprisoned for life.
• Thus, the judge Learned Hand dismissed the petition of Repouille for the
citizenship.
 The dissenting opinion- Judge Jerome Frank

• The Judge Frank said -by filing a new petition-might get the citizenship promptly -
but filing a petition might cause a long and injurious delay.
• The District Judge found enough reasons to grant him the citizenship –not by the
Circuit Judge.
• The constitutional test showed the ethics of the leaders who designed them -the
judgment of another Judge was made upon the public opinion.
• The remark of Gibbon that “the opinion of the world at large”.
• In such cases ‘Judicial notice’ (the knowledge which is attributed by law to judicial
persons, and which does not require to be given them particular case by evidence)
could be applied.
• But, this ‘judicial notice’ - not considered by judges in this case- because of
the shortage of staff in the courts.
• The lacking of Judge’s knowledge, the man’s legitimacy- not be put into
danger.
• The Judge Frank pronounced - a few directions - given to the district judge
to reconsider the petition of Repouille.
• The said conditions - to collect all the data - both sides-to put them in
record - the judge should reconsider his decision.
• Public opinion in this regard (for such cases) was not necessary.
• Judge Frank recommended for a reconsideration of Repouille’s petition.
 Unit-1 (Prose)
Lesson-15
“The law is a jealous mistress- A popular fallacy”
Joseph W Planck
Joseph W Planck
• Joseph W Planck- a member of the Michigan Board of Bar Examiners- the
President of the State Bar of Michigan from 1951 to 1952.
• Practiced in Lansing, Capital of Michigan.
• He articulated the merits of an integrated bar system in and was instrumental in
a change thereof in Michigan.
• Stressed on the relationship - law and basic human values. He lectured in
various platforms about his views on Jurisprudence, Legal Science, and Legal
Philosophy.
The law is a jealous mistress- A popular fallacy
• Joseph W Planck refutes-the Law is a jealous mistress-a popular proverb -
the Anglo-American law fraternity.
• Believed - the statement was a libelous one - utterly false or a fallacy.
• He put forward the views of lawyers and litterateurs - eminent authorities in
their respective fields- agreed to and disagreed to the fundamentals of this
statement/proverb.
• He believed the words of Blackstone, the British jurist who said that the
Lady Common Law does not like to lie alone.
• Instead he proposed that this venerable ghost be laid to rest. He believed that
law cannot be mastered in isolation.
• The point that ultimately the purpose of law- attain social justice.
• It must be mastered along with other disciplines such as History, Anthropology,
Natural Science, Social Science, Political Science, Economics, psychology -will help a
student of law to integrate the philosophy of learning and life with practicing law.
• Merely memorizing statues and law reports -not paying attention- subject of
Jurisprudence or Literature or Science is to give a poverty stricken meaning to the
subject of law.
• A lawyer - not merely store the precedents of law - possess the width of
comprehension, a broad overall outlook of life and the catholicity of compassion - can
be attained by gaining an overall knowledge-by interacting with subject matter experts
from all fields like Philosophy, Economics or History.
• He put forward- the thoughts and views -by many eminent lawyers and specialists
–from Juvenal (early second century AD), a powerful Roman poet to Dean Leon
Green of North-western University of the US (1888 –1979) and Sir Frederick
Macmillan(1851–1936),a British Publisher, widely respected names in the literary
circles.
• He concluded -it is time for the law fraternity to bury the popular fallacy that
‘Law is a Jealous Mistress’ and an epitaph  (an inscription on a tombstone)
reading ‘Requiescat in pace’- (Latin) ‘Rest in Peace’ must be put on the
tombstone.