Morning journal and courier., 1880-01-27
Tuesday Morning, Jan. 27. 1880.

HUN OG 1OWUESs
 There has been for several years consider able dissatisfaction with the mode of select ing judges which prevails in this State. The agitation of the subject resulted in two pro. posed amendments to the constitution which were passed by the House last year, and last week were referred to the Committee on Con- stitutional Amendments. The first of these amendments provides that Judges of the Supreme Court of Errors and of the Superior Court shall upon nomination of the Governor be appointed by the General Assembly in such manner as shall by law be prescribed" The second makes the same provisions as to Courts of Common Pleas and District Courts. These amendments are supported by the State Bar Association and committee of that associa- tion will appear before the committee of the General Assembly and present it's views.
 It is argued that it would be great gain to deprive irresponsible party caucuses of the power to nominate judges and place that power in the hands of the Governor, who would be responsible. There is some force in this on first thought Under the caucus system the candidates are frequently, perhaps generally, unknown to the majority of those asked to nominate them, and their qualified tions must be passed upon without sufficient opportunity for investigation, and without full and free criticism. And there is anoth- CT serious objection to the nomination of judges by caucuses, and that is that the nom nations are often, not to say always, the re- suit of trading. The candidate who can pull the most wires and pull them the most ef- nI merit is substantially lost sight of. That this is true none familiar with .caucuses will deny.
 Moreover, it is pointed out that in ten States judges ars chosen by Governor and Council or Governor and Senate. These States are Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mas sachusetts. Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Michigan, Delaware and Maine. In most of these States the courts have high char acter, and everybody knows how well the Su- preme Court of Maine has recently done it's difficult duty.
 But if it is clear that there ought to be change, it is not so clear that that change ought to give the nominating power to the Governor. What security is there that Governor will make better nominations than a caucus? To be sure, if a Governor makes @ nomination that is really bad, the responsibility for it can be brought home to him. But he would have to make very bad Cor some would say very good) one to be in much danger of getting re- buked The facts in this State show, we be- lieve, that the nominations of Governors have certainly not averaged any better than those made by the General Assembly. Friendship and prejudice have their influence even upon and if Governor is looking out for renomination or for some coveted office he is as apt to trade as are the members of caucus, and to bestow appointments where they will do him the most good rather than upon those most fit for them.
 Many States, including New York, cleo judges by popular vote. There is considera- ble to be said in favor of this method Per haps there is no more probability that an un- fit nomination will be made by popula caucus than by Legislative caucus, and the merits and demerits of candidates for the votes of the people are apt to be pretty thor oughly discussed by the press. Then, too. a judge whose continuance in office depended directly upon the peoples votes would natur- ally try to make good record. If the people eau be trusted to elect thsir Governors. why not their judges? Would they elect poorer judges than those who get on the bench under the present system?
 The matter is very important one and should be fully discussed before any action is taken. If all the future Governors of Con necticut are to be wise, good and independent it may be advisable to give them more ap- pointing power, as they would use it for the good of the people. But considering the case as it is actually likely to be, it does not seem that there is anything to be gained by the proposed change.