Judge Goff Reversed

Judge Goff of the Circuit Court of the United State has reversed a recent ruling stating that South Carolina registration officers could act under illegal election laws.

Judge Goff of the Circuit Court of the United States for the district of South Carolina has been reversed in his ruling granting an injunction restraining the registration officers of the State of South Carolina from acting under an illegal election law. This action was taken on an appeal from his decision brought in the United States Circuit Court of Appeals, Chief Justice Fuller, Judge Hughes and Judge Seymour presiding. After reading the opinion, we see plainly that the merits of the case are not discussed so far as the constitutionality of the law is concerned. Not one of the judges have dared to pass upon the main point at issue; namely, that the law is unconstitutional, and consequently in its enforcement a hardship would be practiced upon the citizens and inherent rights taken away. We have read with care the brief of Chief Justice Fuller and the remarkable production of Judge Hughes, who appears to be now in his dotage. Both of these documents are mere juggleries with existing conditions, an evasion of facts known to exist and an attempt to skim over a violation of the constitution of the United States by men in high judicial places who should have known that the object of all law is to ascertain the right of a question and mete justice. But the following extract is significant and illustrates the point we wished to dwell upon:
“By section 5, appeals or writs of error may be taken to the Supreme Court in any case in which the Constitution of law of a State is claimed to be in contravention of the Constitution of the United States, but although the constitutionality of a State law may be drawn in question in the Circuit Court, yet if the case may be disposed of on other grounds, not involving the validity of such a law we think this court has jurisdiction on appeal.”
This involved the question of jurisdiction. The attorneys of the state of South Carolina should have been made to appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, where the constitutional questions should have been passed upon. This action of this Appellate Court is the most radical enunciation of state’s rights we have yet seen. Another case should at once be made upon and the matter taken to the Supreme Court of the United States where the questions at issue can be properly passed upon. All talk about there being no question of federal election involved is the “merest moon-shine” and yet Judge Hughes assigns this as one of reasons for reversing Judge Goff. South Carolina has no more right to take from a citizen his constitutional privileges in a state election than it has in a national one, and he has as good a basis for an appeal to a federal judge as he would have under any other circumstances. Judge Hughes action in writing a personal opinion criticizing the action of a fellow judge is the most flagrant violation of all official rules of judicial etiquette we have as yet seen. If the court had desired him to formulate its opinion it would have so signified. As for the Republicanism, it would not stand an hour’s washing, so spurious has it become. We had hoped that he would not allow his apparent anxiety for public approval to get the better of his judgment, to end that he would rush in print in advance of the written opinion of the court itself.
His surprising ebullitions in publishing articles on the silver question were in bad taste to say the least. One in reading them became convinced that he was just like the senators, who delivered lengthy speeches upon the same subject – the more you read of them the more apparent it became that they knew no more about the silver question than the reader. If Judge Hughes would change the sign on the front of his establishment, so that it would read “Democrat” instead of “Republican”, the public would be less ill at ease and the surprise occasioned by his actions would be lessened by his injudicious utterances, emanating from the point of a pen.

“Judge Goff Reversed,” Black Virginia: The Richmond Planet, 1894-1909, accessed January 20, 2026, https://blackvirginia.richmond.edu/items/show/1418.