New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-08-07

opposition to tho plan. The spectacle OF
judicial officers taking an active part in secur-
ing their own nomination and electiOn-and it
seems almost impossible In the present condi-
ton of politics for it to be Otherwise-is not
pleasant or assuring one to those VINO
appreciate the need of men of the highest
character on the bench, and their absolute IN
dependence of all partisan complications. Re
Election on the character of the caucus man
ayers who really select tho Judges, is still less
pleasant Dignifed and able as the Court OF
Appeals is, it cannot but weaken 1t to nave
the fact remembered that the majority OF It's
members were selected at cOnvtn-
ton over which William NJ. Tweed
presided, and that the minority were
deliberately chosen (and pushed ahead by
methods peculiar to themselves,) by those two
thoughtful patriots, James O'Brien and Thomas
Murphy. But for facts like these Mr. OCOn-
ors sharp attack upon the Court would have
been robbed OF half its force, since mono
would have credited its insnuatiOns.
And vet the fact remains that within the
past two years the people of this State have
voted down by an overwhelming majority
proposed amendment to the Constitution
vesting the appointment OF Judges IN the
Executive This they did in full view
of scandals, fresh in mind, which IL
Illustrated most forcibly the weakness
and the dangers of the elective system,
and in spite of the fact that there
was no organized opposition to the meas
ure, none of the political parties having taken
| a hostile attitude toward it. 1t was not easy
to account for so unexpected and adverse a
result. Perhaps the remark OF one OF the
Judges of our Supreme Court in explanation
of his own vote may furnish the solution. lie,
| like the large majority OF members OF the legal
profession, had been always in favor OF tho
appointive system, but when he came to vote
he said it occurred to him that after all 1t
was depositing great and possibly dam
cerous power in the hands of one man.
He remembered that President Grant had
taken advantage of his position to appoint two
Judges to the Supreme Court or the ohi'eu
States with the understood purpose or affect
| ing the decision of that tribunal upon single
case that the President had virtually packed
the Supreme Court in the legal-tender cases,
| to reverse its own record and upset the
plain language of the Constitution ;
and he then made ND his mind that with all
the dangers arising from the elective system,
il was to be preferred to the proposed plan OF
| committing so important a trust to the hands
of one man. So he voted against the amend
mcnt, and to continue the election OF Judges
by the people. Doubtless great many Others
| followed the same process of reasoning ana
were induced by their experience OF President
Grants appointments to vote against any
| change.
We do not by any means admit the force
of such an argument. Because the President
| in a single instance abused the power Entrusted
| to him, it does not follow that the system OF
Executive appointments is bad or dangerous.
| President Grant has done great many things
| during his administration that were entirely
unique. They had no precedent, and
will furnish none. Against this mschiev-
Gus and dangerous act may be set the
undesirable historical fact that in hundred
wears of experience Of Executive appointments
there has never been, with this exception, a
| single instance of the abuse of power The
long array of great and hOnOrcd names that
have adorned the bench of Our Federal courts,
and the records of their decisions which for
learning and scholarship have no super!ors III
any judicial annals all attest the merits or the
system under which they were appointed. 1t
| is to be regretted that the effect of President
| Gnnt's action in the matter referred to
should have be,-l to impair public conf
dence in method of appointment which has
for hundred years succeeded so well, and has
given us so large an array OF able, pure, and
upright judges. With men of high character
and Conscientious convictions occupying Execu-
tive chairs in the States and in the nation,
there would be 10 danger of unfit appoint
ments or abuse of power. We hope to see be-
fore many years the constitutional amendment
which was defeated in 1878 again taken up
| and adopted.