The appointment of a lawyer to the Supreme Court tempts us to inquire into his earlier career, and particularly the economic interests he represented, for a clue to his future performance as a judge. What is past is prologue, to be sure; but the drama as it unfolds may be full of surprise. A crude economic interpretation of the judicial office ignores too many elements of character. The taking of the robe, an experience at once emancipating and humbling, is apt to dissolve old ties and to quicken the sense that there is no escape from that judgment of one's successors which is called history.
The record of the Court is full of cautions against the generalization that the lawyer is father to the judge. It was a successful lawyer for shipping interests, Henry Billings Brown, who, as Mr. Justice Brown, delivered a memorable dissent in the cases that invalidated the income tax: ". . . the decision involves