The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-08-02
Arn Indioinl Decisions ABOVE Criticisml 2

To IT true. then that the decisions of a Judge
ougbt not to be oanvassed when he is pre-
sented to the people as candidate 1t GER
tainly cannot be true as general and unli-
mited proposition. It is easy to conceive OF
,rd;c;al decisions which would be so mani
fsstlv ignorant, corrupt or vicious in prin-
o;nle ss 70 render the Judge whoshou deliver
them totally unworthy OF public confidence.
But are there not other instances where
iudpe may make decision which may pro
nerly be used against him in case he again
becomes candidate for office
Suppose Judge, in some important case, to
make decision which the people believe to be
bad la,c, and destructive Of the best interests
of society: have they not right at the
earliest opportunity to displace that judge,
and put in his stead a man of different views
Suppose Judge to decide a certain law to
be unconstitutional, when the people believe
that it is constitutional: have they no resort
but to change their Constitution? May they
not rightfully put judge on the bench who
believes as they do in regard to the Consti-
tuition?
Suppose a Judge makes decision which
outrages the moral sense as well as the legal
sense Of the nation: must we accept it with
out criticism and if such judge were to
present himself as a candidate for reelec-
ton under an elective Judiciary system, would
it not be legitimate to make this obnoxious
decision of his one of the chief reasons for
opposing his reelection
When Chief Justice Taney made the in
famous Dred Scott decision, large portion
of the people of this country felt that it was
bad law, a false Interpretation of the Constitu-
tiOn, an outrage upon justice and right.
Now, suppose the Supreme Court of the
United States had been elective, and
that Chief Justice Taney had pre-
sented himself to the people as candidate
for reelection: would not that decision have
been a legitimate weapon to have used against
him in the canvass Indeed, would it not
have properly constituted one of the chief
issues of the canvass?
When, in this State, during the war, a
Democratic judge decided the draft to be un-
constitutional, and thus sought to cripple the
Government in its efforts to overthrow the
Rebellion, did not the loyal people do right in
making that decision a test issue in the judi
cial election which followed, and in putting on
the bench judge who would interpret the
Constitution in harmony with the loyal senti-
ment of the State Did we hear any plati-
tudes then from professedly loyal Republican
journals, that judicial decisions upon points of
law ought not to be cited against candidates
There is a broad basis of reason in this
matter. One of the chief functions of the
Judiciary under our system is to decide Con-
StitnionGl questions. The Constitution being
the supreme law of the land, to which all
legislative enactments must conform, wide
field is open for the judges in deciding whether
or not laws are constitutional. We believe
there has not been single measure adopted
either in our State or National Legislatures by
the Republican party, looking towards the en-
reimbursement, elevation, or the protection
even, of the colored people of this country
that has not been pronounced demonstrations
by the Democracy. Indeed, the entire Re
publican policy is so denounced at the presen
time. But all this policy must, so far as
assumes the form of legislative enactment
pass before the Judiciary. The Democrats
Judge, if honestly holding the views of hi
party, must decide it to be unconstitutional
The two great laws passed during the war, th
one designed to furnish money and tn
other to provide men for carrying on tn
contest did come up in this very way befor
Democratic judges in this State, and wer
both decided to be unconstitutional. CoulC
those decisions have been carried out, the Gov
ernment would have raised neither men no
money in Pennsylvania except by voluntary
contribution and enlistment. But now we ar
told, when one Of these judges presents him
self for reelection and for promotion, that thi
decision of his should not be used against him
PreposteroHs But sohy not He was honest
they say. Well, what of itf Does tina
change the character of his decisionP Doe
that make his bad law to be good law1 Doe
that make his false construction Of the Coz
gtitution to be true one
Such was 'rnis understanding of the law,
SAYS another. Quite likely, but such is N
the peopIe's understanding of the law, and the
do not want such a construction of the law
prevail. Suppose Judge sharswOOd's deCisi'
could to-day be enforced what havoc and ru
e. would make through all our business ci
oles And have we no right to protect ou
..-..t s,,oI a danoar If a1aotad