New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-12-14
TIE SUPREME COURT AZ Al ELECTORAL
COLLEGE.


COLLEGE.
John Randolph, who combined exnsof-
binary sagacity with an eccentric ana IN
dependent expression, WAS . member OF .
eonv.ntlon for anendirg thS eouseftatioo
Of his naaive State. During tho Discus
iou upon the policy Of investing the judi
ciary with certain questionable powers,
he is reported to have said:
We should remember, Mr.. President, that
70 revere, the Book Of Kings comes next
| after the Book Of Judges. -,s.s., ..
The, Book of Ruth is but . parenthetical
narrative. We suppose the reasoning to
be, that people disguised with kings ana
distrustful Of themselves, seek protection
from despotism and revolution in the
futile device Of comforting upon men un-
der one designation . power which had
been abused by men under another. The
men who founded the republic had had
both TIE Book of Judges and the Book
Of Kings. They knew that the judge had
been once an attorney at law; that the
qualities of an advocate require . fexi-
bility of mind which can turn from one
side Of clause to the other; that this
quality rejoices in the ability to refute its
own conclusions, and finds conscien-
tious consolation in the fact that justice
requires every legal and rhetorical sdvsn-
tage to be afforded to the client 1t is
natural, therefore, that this practice Of
bringing to the support Of . professional
opinion tho best exertion Of the intellect
should impair even . native inpsrtiahty,
and accompany the advocate upon the
bench. The trainers Of the re-
public have left evidence of ex-
traordinsry historical research, and
the Federal constitution is the result
of an endeavor to eliminate from our own
the proven defects Of other forms Of gov
erment We may safsly affirm Chat in
I'LL ages the judiciary has conformed iss
opinions to the power which has APP
pointed it. In England there was before
the trainers Of the constitution the memory
of the infamous agent, Jehries, Of the
tyrannical James. There Was also the
fresh remembrance Of the Kings attorney
who argued that the colenies Of AnsEiss
were represented in Parliament 'hs parcel
of the manor of East Greenwich" Judge
Mansfield had given evidence Of his poll
teal subserviency in abandoning The
Stuart succession and accepting ONCE
from the House of Hanover, and his rul-
ings were invariably fox the crown and
its prerogatives. One Of their most Sc
we're allegations against the government
Of King George was that
He has obstructed the admiaistfation of
Justice by refusing bis sssent to laws for
Establishing judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his
will alone for the tenure Of their offices
and the amount and payment of their sal
aries.
In our own Union it is notorious that
the ruling of the Judiciary accompanies
the political opinions Of the power that
elects or appoints it. 1t is in our opinion
defect in our own State constitution
that the judiciary should in any. event be
appointed by the executive.
The reason for the invariab.s COM
pliance of the Judiciary with the will and
wishes Of the power that appoints con-
sists in this: Tha. no power or no people
would commit to men who differed from
this power in the. construction of any
political or legal question likely to be in
issue before the courts. The Supreme
Coprt of the Emitted States decided in
favor Of slavery and slavery, extension
under Judge fancy. It reversed that |
doctrine under Judge Chase; There is
no imputstion upon either court. Each
was appointed to Office because the ap-
pointing power required q judicial de-
cision in accordance with its principles
and it's policy. The infnitude. of petty
judges who have ruled that an
obligation was or was not binding upon
The parties or upon the people, proves the
same fact-that the judiciary 10 but the
creature of the power that appoints it to
office. 1t was shown BY Mr.. Calhoun that
he Supreme Court Of the United States
was but the result of popular will. work
ing through the organisms of the consti-
luton. He therefore excepted to its
lrbitrament upon any question to which
State was party.
If this reasoning be correct-if it be vim
Heated by ancient and modern example,
vby should we assign to special, if not q
department, of the general
government the decision, Of q question
which determines the administration Of
mother coordinate department? If the
executive may not without confirmation by
he council of the States appoint Judge
# the Supreme Count, why should a
udge Or judges Of the Supreme Court APP
Joint the executive? If Congress dis |,
rusts its own integrity, why make re-
urning board Of the Supreme Court2 Is
supposed that men called judges would
scape the personal impqtations cast upon
men called Senator's Have NOT Mar
hall, fancy and Chase each incurred
'recisely the common terms of obloquy /,
pplied to the worst criminals? Their sue
essors can not expect that the ermine will