Litchfield enquirer. [volume] (Litchfield, Conn.) 1829-current, 1880-09-16
The Constitutional Amendment.

The following proposed constitutional
amendment altering the mode Of appointing
the judges of our higher courts, having pass
ed two legislatures, comes before the people
for final action on the first Monday of Oct,
next:
The Judges OF the supreme court of errors
and of the superior court shall, upon nomina-
ton of the governor, be appointed by the
general assembly in such manner as shall by
law he prescribed.
Special electors meetings are to he called on
the first Monday in October at which the
voters will be called upon to vote "Yes" or
'.No" upon this. amendment. Tits little
discussed as yet, by the state press; though,
so far as we have observed comment
has been favorable. Every well informed per-
son is dissatisfied with the present mode of ap-
pointment. A caucus is seldom governed by con-
sideratlons of fitness, or of public interest In
such gatherings these appointments are apt to
be controlled by log-rolling arrangements such
as give appointments to those who are least
worthy of them. The Courant puts the mat
ter briefly and forcibly, thus:
The amendment to be voted for at the Oc-
tober election is one which meets the hearty
approval of those who wish to see the Con-
nectlcut judiciary made what it ought to be.
1t takes the nomination out of the caucus,
where it is too often the prize OF the success
full wire -puller or the man who can control
the biggest lobby. 1t makes it the duty of
the governor to select the candidate, with the
consciousness that an unfit selection will be
foip 10 of IA ms A
caucus is irresponsible, while the governor
| would he held to strict responsibility.
Whatever party may be in power in Connec-
| ticut 1t will very seldom happen that any man
| can be elected governor who will not be SIM
cerely DESTROYS to keep the character OF the
| state bench at the highest point. And the
danger of unfit selections is guarded against
| by requiring for an election the consenting
vote of both houses of the legislature. There
ought to be full affirmative vote in favor of
the amendment.
In this connection we cannot but think it
opportune to place before our readers again
the views of Jehn Stuart Mill on the subject
of legislative appointments. Connecticut ex-
perence has proved them eminently wise and
just
The qualifications which fit special individ-
ualS IOr special duties can only DC FeCOs0lZeu
by those who know the individuals, or who
made it their Business to examine and Judge
of persons from what they have done, or from
the evidence of those who are in position to
Judge When these conscientious obligations
are so little regarded by great public officers
who can be made responsible for their ap-
pointments how must it be with assemblies
who cannot? Even now, the worst appoint
ments are those which are made for the sake
of gaining support or dsarming opposition in
the representative body: what might we ex-
pect if they were made by the body itself !?
Numerous bodies never regard speci al quail
fications at ALL Unless a man is fit for the
gallows, he Is thought to be about as fit as
other people for almost anything for which he
can offer himself as candidate. When ap-
pointments made by public body are not de-
cided, as they almost always are, by party
connexion or private jobbing man is ap-
pointed either because he has reputation,
often quite undeserved, for general ability, or
frequently for no better reason than that he is
personally popular.