Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1852-04-17
WASHINGTON.
SATURDAY, APRIL II, 1852.

\ In brief comment upon our lately-expresse
opinion that the Independence of the judiciary
endangered by giving the choice Of Judges to tn
People in periodical primary elections, the " Union
expresses itself in the following terms, which "
quote literally that our readers may profit by tn
courteous tone as well as by the objections of ou
contemporary:
"OaD FodYIsM--GEsUINEs---We hear q great deal o
very absurd and unneanng tabbe about old fogrism
but here is specimen of the genuine article from tn
pen of our venerable nsighbor Of the National Ltgeeer
Speakngof the proposed revision of the Constitution
Louisiana question Upon which the people of that Stats
voted yesteaiay-the Lntaligencer says:
One of she oldest arguments to our conception il
favor of revision of the Constitution and which urged
by one of the conservative Journals of New Orleans too
is the ndpedncso the Judiciary by giving the
choice of Judges to the People, nsead Of their being ap
pointed at present. by the Executive Of the State
This change, ertsdng itself from State another u.s. zoe
aRpreend gradually oossning The Framework of instu-
lions"
'We shall be glad if the Lsgencer will state one rsa-
son, to be reason why Judge
elected by the people in fact less independent like
y to be less independent than the Judge when APP
pointed by Goyeror-the Governor himself holding his
appointing power because elected by the peope."*
Assuredly we donot feel called upon by the chal-
lenge Of our neighbor to enter into general dis
cusson Of the merits Of the various modes in which
the Judges of the different States, may be APP
pointed to Office. But, as we are somewhat defied
to adduce even zone phrase purporting to be
reason /" against the election Of the Judiciary by
popular suffrage, we will try to do SO.
1t is to be observed that, in the supposed i'm
provements which have been made of late years in
the Constitutions of several Of the States, short
term of office in lieu of the tenure durng good be-
havior, has uniformly accompanied the substitution
Of direct popular elections for appointments by the
Governor, or Legislature of State, or both COM
bined. And the tendency Of these two departures
from the universally accepted ideas of 1877, when
the Old Fogies of the country met in Conven-
ton to form Constitution for the United States,
we hold to be to produce Instability, feebleness, and
partiality in the administration of justice
We have never denied that Judges, like all other
public officers, should be subject to the will of the
People; for this proposition, comprehended in its
legitimate bearing, lies at the very foundation of
our political system. But what is the will of the
people? 1t is to be found, in its most imposing
form, in their deliberate convictions solemnly ex-
pressed in the Constitutions Of their States
md not merely, nor certainly, nor always, in the
ebulition of party feeling, passion, or
prejudice, which sways community for a time, and
noists Governor into office, or expels Member of
Congress from it, because he has resisted the tide of
! false and empty, and perhaps baneful enthusiasm.
The will of people-that is the will of the major
ty Of them-may be one thing to-day and quite
mother thing in one year hence. The majority of
o-day may think that certain usage or law is un-
constitutional. A Judge may differ from them If
he acts upon his own convictions, he pronounce
lis decisions from the bench under the apprehen-
on and with the expectation should an election for
Judge soon ensue, that he will be condemned by the
,rejudces of those opposed to his opinion, and will
,e compelled to vacate his Office, on which perhaps
he entirely relies for support. We believe that
most of those who members of our upright Judi
,ary would not regard consequences in a case of
conflict between the proper Interpretation of the law
md the temporary blindness of their felow-citizens
We doubt not that fiat justitia, rudt colum, would
De- as it has almost universally been, their motto.
But still there is the temptation, to which men of
III calibers of mind and integrity are subjected and
% which we have no right to expose them. As
general principle, how can we certainly calculate
hat a man, whose whole dependence for livelihood
S on the Office he holds, will act in perfectly in
dependent manner, and decide for against power
ul demagogue, for instance, without fear, favor,
Or affection" on the eve Of an election, which may
result in his defeat by the influence Of the person
who has felt himself wronged by the judicial de-
,ision? How can we confidently expect him to
stand up against the tyranny of faction, popular
'dium, and even popular resistance, and to pro-
,ounce with impartiality in case which will fur
nish handle for opposing (and probably hostile)
candidates to undermine him in public confidence,
md to render him odious, not for doing wrong but
perhaps precisely because he has refused to be in
in wrongdoing? Is it too much to
adopt the language of learned writer, who agrees
with us that, under such circumstances, "public
" justice will be administered with faltering and
q feeble hand. 1t will secure nothing but its own
place and the appreciation of those who value
because they control it. 1t viii decree what best
suits the opinion of the day and will forget that
the precepts Of the law rest on eternal foundations
The rulers and the citizens will not stand upon an
equal ground in litigations The favorites of the
day will overawe by their power, or seduce by their