JEFFREY AMESTOY SWORN IN AS CHIEF JUSTICE

• to contribute to the faith of Vermont citizens in our judicial system
• to contribute to a body of law that clearly communicates the standards to be used to achieve the just and timely resolution of disputes
• to ensure that the Judiciary, as a separate and co-equal branch of government, has the resources necessary to fulfill its responsibilities and the accountability for the use of those resources.

Three weeks ago at the occasion of my nomination for the position of Chief Justice, I said I had so many people to thank, I didn't know where to end.

Today the task is even more difficult.

But I still know where to start: Thank you Governor Dean.

To my "particular friend", Susan Lonergan Amestoy: I could not have made this journey without you - and it wouldn't have been as much fun.

To Katherine, Christina, and Nancy Amestoy - for whom this is the third visit to the State House this month - thank you for your patience.

I thought the events of the past thirty days might have been bewildering to our daughters, but Katie Amestoy had it exactly right when she told a friend on the day of my second interview with the Governor:
"I can't come over today - my Dad's trying out for Chief Justice."

I thank my mother, Diana Wood Amestoy, for being here today and for always being there in times of need.

For those of you for whom a desire to impress your parents is a part of your motivation, I offer the following cautionary tale.

When I called my mother to tell her of my nomination she replied:
"That's wonderful. I've just been hang gliding in Montana."

If I can bring one half of my mother's energy, and one quarter of her sense of humor to my new responsibilities, Vermont will be well served.

Thank you Attorney General Doyle and thank you Attorney General Malley for your generous words.

Present today are colleagues - current and former - from the National Association of Attorneys General. They - together with the staff of the Vermont Attorney General's Office, have not only supported me professionally during the last dozen years - they have been among my closest friends.

And if it is true - as I believe it to be - that one can be judged by the friends one treasures, then you will understand why their being here today means so much to me.

There are also here individuals to whom I cannot ever make an adequate expression of thanks.

When I became a candidate for public office, the best advice I ever received was:
 "Never pass an old friend to say hello to a new one."

Today is special for many reasons, but most of all because our old friends are here.

Twenty years ago as a young Assistant Attorney General, I spent a Sunday in the law library preparing for an oral argument the next day before the Vermont Supreme Court.

Then, as now, the law library was next to the Court. But in those days the doors to the Supreme Court were unlocked during the weekend.

And so when I finished a long day's preparation, I went into the empty courtroom and sat in the seat of a Vermont Supreme Court Justice.

The next morning I appeared before the Court. As chance would have it, as I began my argument, I was interrupted by Justice Larrow.

Some here may remember Justice Larrow's reputation as an incisive interrogator. If you argued before him you will recall his habit of clearing his throat just before he reached the most penetrating portion of his inquiry.

"Mr. Amestoy", he began, "would you please tell this Court what give you the right..." and at this point, as Justice Larrow began clearing his throat, I was struck with the awful realization that it was Justice Larrow's seat I had sat in the previous afternoon.

For one terrible moment I thought I was going to be asked: "what gives you the right to sit in the seat of a Justice of the Vermont Supreme Court?"

There may be some here who have a similar question. If so I am grateful to you - as I was to Justice Larrow that day - for not asking.

I believe - if I meet the standards I have set for myself - the question will occur to you less often in the future.

I am privileged to join a Court comprised of individuals with whom I have worked and for whom I have great respect.

Justice Johnson and I worked closely together at the Office of Attorney General where she was an unexcelled Chief of the Public Protection Division.

I have known Justice Morse since his service as Defender General and his work as one of Vermont's finest trial judges.

Justice Dooley and I worked together when he served as Governor Kunin's legal counsel and Secretary of Administration. More recently, I participated with Justice Dooley in the court - prosecution program in Karelia. Joining us in Russia was, among others, Maryland Attorney General Joseph Curran.

Hence, Attorney General Curran is the only Attorney General in the country that knows both John Dooley and me. It was that knowledge that led the Maryland Attorney General to offer the observation when he learned that John and I were being considered for Chief Justice, that I was a strong second choice.

That is an opinion, I know, that is not exclusive to the State of Maryland.

Justice Gibson, as all who know him would anticipate, has been extraordinarily generous and helpful to me.

All here know, I am sure, that Justice Gibson's career is consistent with the unparalleled contributions to public service by the Gibson family.

What may be less well known is that Justice Gibson plays first base for the combined Court/Attorney General softball team.

As a rookie second baseman, I was saved from several errors by the sure grasp and long range of first baseman Gibson.

I will rely on that same grasp and range to minimize the errors of a Rookie Chief Justice.

I also take the liberty today of expressing my gratitude to former Chief Justice Allen - not just for his courtesies to me but for his service to Vermont.

In the 1980s history linked the Chief Justice of Vermont and the Attorney General of Vermont more closely than either one of us would have chosen. Although I do not know all that occurred during the unhappy years enveloped by the "judicial misconduct" controversy, I know more than all but a few in this chamber.

It may be that another individual in the position of Chief Justice during those troubled years, could have struck the critical balance necessary to keep the Court functioning without sacrificing the integrity of the institution.

But I, for one, am glad that we do not have to test the hypothetical.

And surely it is difficult - even as a hypothesis - to imagine another Chief Justice who could have brought the Court through those difficult days and led the Court to a point - where by every objective measure - it is now more efficient than at any time in its history.

So today I deliver my first opinion as Chief Justice. It is one which I know to be unanimous. It is an opinion which will be corroborated by the judgment of history:
Frederic Allen was a great Chief Justice.

Fred Allen's shoes are big ones to fill.

But - I brought my own shoes.

If a span of years in which to serve as Chief Justice is granted to me by God and the Legislature (that's an Alphabetical listing, Mr. Speaker!), I shall judge my success - or lack thereof - against three objectives.

First - and by far the most important - did I contribute to the faith of Vermont citizens in our judicial system and to their trust in the character of those entrusted with its authority?

Second did I, as Chief Appellate Judge of Vermont, contribute to a body of law that clearly and concisely communicates to litigants, lawyers, and trial judges the standards to be used to achieve the just and timely resolution of disputes.

Third, did I as Chief Justice ensure that the Judiciary, as a separate and co-equal branch of government, has the resources necessary to fulfill its responsibilities and the accountability for the use of those resources.

For that work, I will need the help of all, most especially the judges and staff of the trial courts who honor me with their presence today.

When it became apparent that I was to assume the duties of a new position, I received several calls from those most directly affected by my status.

The callers were cordial but all had the same message, which may be summarized as follows:

1. I should remember who had trial court experience and who didn't.
2. I should realize that there were many in their group that were equally or more qualified than I.
3. I should never forget that while I might now have the impressive title, the real work was done in the trenches of the day to day business of the trial courts.

I trust that my past work will offer some guide to what the future may hold.

In any event, I shall do my best to avoid the example of the Vermonter who - when asked by his neighbor if he had an opinion about a controversial issue to be heard at Town Meeting - replied:

"Not yet. But when I do take a position, I'm prepared to be bitter!"

I believe in "civility in public discourse and constancy in private affection."

And I believe, with Learned Hand, that "the spirit of liberty is the spirit that is not too sure it is right."

We will need that spirit more than ever to meet the changes that the new century will surely bring.

Two years ago, I spoke to new citizens at a Naturalization ceremony in Newport, Vermont. The event coincided with the completion of the debate in the Vermont Legislature over the proposed resolution relating to the flag burning amendment.

That probably accounted for the fact that the hosts for the ceremony - the American Legion - were somewhat less enthusiastic about my presence than when the invitation to speak was extended.

But whatever one's view of that proposed amendment, it is remarkable, as I observed then, that upon taking the oath of citizenship, had one of the new citizens refused to recite the pledge of allegiance, neither the Attorney General of Vermont, nor the Attorney General of the United States, nor the entire United States government could have compelled recitation of the pledge.

Indeed, the judicial system would have protected the new citizen and provided redress for any attempted compulsion.

But, of course, each of the new citizens recited the pledge of allegiance of their own free will and with more meaning than I am accustomed to hearing.

It is an inherent American trait to look to the courts to vindicate one's rights. With God's grace, it shall always be so. But it is neither law nor courts that shall secure our future.

"Liberty", said Learned Hand, "lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it; no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it."

So although I have much to learn about judging, it seems to me that Curtis Bok was right when he said of his own judicial experience "...there still remains [a] mystery... [that] defies analysis."

"Perhaps", wrote Judge Bok, "it would be better to say that a judge's cases take hold of him and pull things out of him, and that it is his business to be sure to keep the proper supplies on hand, so far as he can be the master of that."

If "the proper supplies" - or at least a portion of them - are integrity and hard work; compassion and common sense; an abiding respect for the dignity of the individual and the value of community, then to the extent I start today with those "supplies", it is because of the people in this room and the Vermont we love.

And it is because of one who is not here nor ever could be the seven other times his son took the oath of office in this historic chamber.

More than four decades ago, a young father took his son to Hand's Cove on Lake Champlain for a day of duck hunting.

But the father soon understood that of his son a hunter he could not make.

So he turned the day into a history lesson for Hand's Cove is where Ethan Allen and the Green Mountain Boys gathered before their raid on Ft. Ticonderoga in the early morning of May, 1775.

From the father's description of the events sprung a boy's interest in history and the individuals and ideas that shape it.

Many years later - when the boy was much older than the father had been on that day - his interest in law led him to Learned Hand.

And to the realization - which somehow seemed fitting - that Hand's Cove was the home of - indeed had been named for - the Vermont ancestors of the great judge.

Logic tells me that there is no connection in the coincidence of a place from which sprung the beginnings of this State, and the family of a remarkable jurist, and a father's gift to his son.

But my heart tells me otherwise.

And I believe in the "restless wisdom of the heart."

And I believe, too, in the wisdom of the poet who says to each of us - a Chief Justice no less than the child who even now gazes out a window, perhaps on Leonard Street -

 "We see but what we have the gift of seeing" - to this life "what we bring, we find."