Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1873-07-05
Is IT A RA1LUeEp

Referring to the abundance Of dis
cussion concerning the recent Illinois
judicial election and its result, the
Hartford tConn.l Comant says: "The
people know and care nothing about
the Dartmouth college precedent
They firmly believe they are oppressed
by the railroad monopolies, and nat
urally look to their State Legislatures
for relief. This is good common sense
sven If unsound from a legal stand
point. The conclusion Of the whole
matter is. that while the people can
hardly be blamed for electing judges
who will make decisions to meet their
views. the elective system for the judi
ciary Is dangerous" This seems to be
a growing feeling everywhere. 1t Is
true that the people OF Illinois can
hardly be censured for doing what
doubtless has, in many cases, been done
by railroad companies, /. e., elect
Ing judges favorable, and per-
haps even committed secretly to
certain measures they desire sus-
tanned by the courts. No doubt
not only farmers. but other classes Of
people have. in many instances, good
cause to complain Of Injustice and OPP
preston. But II railroad judges have
besn elected, 1t has been done not by
openly pledging them in mass meet
ings to decide In certain directions,
not By making direct open assaults
upon the judiciary. but by secret influ-
ences brought to bear upon the candid
ates, both before ard after the election.
The question Of prejudging civil cases
by conventions prior to an election,
and before such cases have ever been
raised in a court Of justice, was never,
until this Illinois election, decided at
the polls. 1t has therefore, n nat
urally, created much comment not
only in the public journals but
among all those who appreciate Its
effec, upon the judicial system Of III
Government. New York, We believe,
wa the first to Introduce the elective
feature into her State Constitution, in
the belief that it was an innovation of
pure Democracy, which could but be
productive Of benefit. She has tried 1t
for many years and the result Is that
the ancient purity Of her judiciary and
the authority of its decisions have re-
trograded yearly until from the fore
most rank the former has degenerated
into corruption and rottenness, pub
licly known throughout the Union,
and the later decisions Of her courts
have but little weight compared with
those Of. earlier years. The appoint
i've system il also not without Its
faults. The late Chief Justice stated
one Of the gravest when he said, refer
ring to the famous legal tender decis-
ion, that the Supreme Court had
been packed" in the interest OF
m~oneyed monopolies. This may have
been the case. 1t could not have &C.
CURED. however, had not Congress ill.,
creased the number Of Supreme Judges.
With an appointivo system, wherein
judges hold for life or good behavior,
no sudden changes are at all likely to
be made. Judges do not all die at
once, and, only In extraordinary con-
tingencies, could a court be packed
by an executive. That this question
will be more warmly discussed during
the next few years than any other, we
fully believe, and all arguments pro
and con, will be urged against and for
either system. 1t will bear discussion.
The security Of all the dearest rights
of a citizen depends upon an honest
and impartial judiciary. II the elect
i've system fills the bench with upright
men, better than the appointive,
let US retain it everywhere, but in view
OF Its results upon the New York judi
clary, and the recent Illinois election.
it may we'll be asked If it DO not a
failure. ,