Republican vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1857, 1850-05-13
From the Kentucky Yeoman.
An Elective Judiciary.

This. we are told by the advocates Of the Office
holders constitution, is most dangerous expert
ment What, the people, the common people elect
Judge! This idea is preposterous 1t can never
be- They may ell enough elect President, men,
bers of Congress, Governor, members ofthe legls-
Iature. but what do the common people know of a
Judge! They cannot, they ale not qualified to
choose an honest pright& independent judiciary
Money, and other corupting influences Will
control the elections and wealth and power
will control the Judge when elected. And those
who advocate this system are denounced as an.
archists and disorga1lizers This is nothing
new
Such has ever been the character of epithets
heaped upon those who oppose the concentra-
ton of power in the hands of few. 1t was the
language of many i'll 1898, when the people
of Kentucky and Virginia opposed the alien and
sedition laws. The like language was used in
1775 when the people of America rose in their
might and resisted British usurpation.
When forming our Federal Constitution, the
advocates for the concentration OF power IN the
hands of the few, then, as now, pointed to the
English Government, as in their opinion, "torm
ing the best model in the world.n We were
then told that the people OF the several States
were incompetent to elect their own Governors
or establish their own courts, but that the Leg
lSiaturc OF the UHl6u DtdteS sllUulo AafG
power TO establish courts in each State for
the determination of all matters of general
concern, and the Governor or President OF each
State should be appointed by the General Gov
eminent, and should have an absolute veto upon
all laws about 10 be PASSED in the State OF which
he is Governor or President. This system OF
an elective Monarchy, as proposed by Hanil-
ton, was rejected. The people had not become
sstired of an excess of democracy"
But this party did succeed In engrattlng INTO
the Federal Constitution judiciary for life, with
salaries above all law; and the judges irrespon-
sble to any power; and this they call an indie
pendent judiciary, and its eulogy has been the
burden Of the song of every aristocrat from that
day to this And we are still referred by these
lovers of judicial supremacy and irresponsible
ty 10 the English government, to obtain model
for our judiciary. But what, at last, is this in
dependence of the English judge? 1t consists
moi in the mode of his appointment, bat in the
tenure of his office, over which the crown has
no control. 1t is then, independence OF the
King, who is considered the fountain OF honor,
and can do no wrong 1t is not Independence
of the people nor of the Parliament. Parlia-
ment There is not Judge upon the English
bench who is not removable by bare MAORI
ty of Parliament The same manifestation OF
the want of confidence in the capacity OF the
people for self-eovernment exhibited by Hamll-
on and his party in the formation Of the Fede-
raj constitution, and exhibited now by the advo
Gates of the Hunkers' constitution, was mani
tested by the trainers of the first constitution OF
Kentucky. They extended the right OF suffrage
to all free white male citizens over the age OF
twenty-one years. This was an advance upon
the constitution Of Virginia; but distrusting the
capacity of the people, they provided electors
to choose a Governor and select Senate and
IL. I'd of time calactpd thpv
confided the power of creating the Judiciary,
leaving to the people the privilege of electing
members to the lower branch OF the legislature,
electors of the Governor and Senators, Sherlils
and Coroners. The members of the conven-
ton who framed the constitution doubtless de-
sired an independent Executive and Senate
therefore, they refused to have them elected di
rectly by the people. These men We're fresh
from the revolution, and doubtless patriots
But the statesmen of 1899 did not deem their
work too sacred to be touched. They believed
with Mr.. Jefferson, that, claws and institutions
must go hand in hand with the progress OF the
human mind" and, therefore, the constitution
of 90 was more LIBERAL and its trainers mani
tested more confidence in the capacity and vir-
tue of the people, by suffering them to elect their
Governor and Senators Many of the objec-
tionable features of the old system were, howev
er, retained, which we believe have been rene
died by the present new constitution. Inc
people have said that they desire the power not
only to elect their Governor and Senators, but
all their officers in their own hands; and it has
been given them. And why should the judi
cial department be made all exceptions The
people do not belong to the judges--the office
of Judge is created by the people for their con-
venience, and ought to be vacated by the same
power that created it, whenever the public IN
terest or convenience shall require. Io Use the
language of Judge Rowan, Ethe commission OF
the Judge is but his letter of attorney-but the
evidence of his authority to act as agent OF the
people-whch ought to be revocable, like all
others, at the pleasure of the principal. The
doctrine that the tenure of his office by the
Judge would be too precarious fit depended on
the apiH of the people, strikes at the root OF free
government. You can have nothing in free
government more stable than the qraH OF the peo-
pie Ii is absurd to look to the mil Of the Judge
for stability in government. He is tyrant
when he substitutes his own will for that OF the
people. Ii is in their will, and not in his, that
the force of his judgment and DEGREES is to be
found" Away, then, with all this delusiye
iargon about the stability of the judiciary, and
the tumultuous and restless Impotence of the
people! This is the cant of power-the lullaby
by which Liberty has been charmed into repose
and shorn her strength while she slept.
THE JUDICIARY.
| The question of settling the mode of appont