constituency of the court, but after he re- appointed Powers, Watson, and Taylor, he passed over Chief Judge Loveland Munson and Seneca Haselton and named Robert Healy and Leighton Slack instead, advanc- ing Powers to chief justice. This was not re- ceived well.


Fletcher had already broken the tradition in naming George M. Powers as chief judge after John Rowell retired on September 30, 1913, rather than Loveland Munson, who would have taken the first chair by order of seniority. In his December 1914 appoint- ments, Fletcher meddled even more dra- matically with the grand principle of senior- ity, and that created a storm of protest. The annual meeting of the Vermont Bar Associ- ation was postponed a month, until January 5, 1915, when the Association resolved that “the solution of this matter rests with the General Assembly,” and that the legislature “will meet that responsibility and perform its duty faithfully, considerately, and tem- perately.”20


not necessarily to do that which abso- lutely met the wishes of the bar asso- ciation. The bar association is made up of two hundred or more men, but I did have in view primarily as one who had been in this Legislature for ten years and who was in touch with conditions both as such and as executive. I did have in view primarily in the personnel of that court that which I thought best not for the bar association but for the 350,000 people in this State for whom I had taken the oath of office to do the best I could for those were the people I had in view when I took that action.21


Fletcher, condemned for mix- ing politics into the choice of justices, ex- plained his reasoning in his farewell mes- sage, alluding to the age of the men he re- placed, and essentially defying the bar as- sociation:


As to the personnel of the court I have this to say, it is absolutely true that the primary consideration in my mind was


Fletcher claimed he had the opinion of the chief justice that his appointments would extend to two years, and that he had it in writing, signed by Justice Watson.22 Justice Hill believed the most likely rea- son for Fletcher’s apostasy was a reflection of disenchantment within the Court, best il- lustrated by the Court’s decision in Sabre v. Rutland Railroad (1913), which upheld the legislature’s decision to provide the Board of Railroad Commissioners with subpoe- na, contempt, and injunctive powers (en- forceable through the courts).23


Powers and


Watson had dissented; Rowell, Munson and Haselton had upheld the statute. Justice Powers’ dissent is memorable for its pas- sion and outrage at the invasion of quasi-


www.vtbar.org


THE VERMONT BAR JOURNAL • WINTER 2012


9


Ruminations: A Hero Once, a Judge for Life


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40