The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1890-05-26

interested republican politician might
Just as readily reach and which, In our
Judgment, impose on the general pub
lie no stronger obligation than that
which would follow an expression OF
opinion from the meanest citizen, ex-
cept, of course, that the community Is
bound to heed what, he ordains because
he 10 chief justice of Montana.
That there was method on Judge
Blake's part In pursuing this remark
able course, we have no doubt what
ever nor do we hesitate to affirm that
he was prompted by considerations
that do scant credit to this states
highest court. Had Judge Blake taken
up the questions of federal law that
we're argued i'm the hearing Of the
court, an appeal to Washington would
have been possible. Judge Blake had
the power and, for that matter, he had
the right, to block the possibility for
such appeal. That discretionary power
is lodged in the court and Judge Blake
exercised Is. IL was unfair-in our
judgment IL was wrong, but the thing
was done, and il involves simply a
question of the moral responsibility Of
the chief justice to the people of Mon
tana. IL becomes therefore a part of
the issue which, we again declare, will
never be settled until the people go to
the polls and record their final verdict
on every phase of this complicated
case. The people will do that next
November. IL in that election the
democrats prevail, the august popular
tribunal that is above abuse or hasty
Impeachment, will then have decreed
by popular vote that the rejection of
the tunnel vote was crime, that San
ders and his companion are thieves
and that the supreme court was unduly
biased by partisan considerations in
the verdict il rendered. We believe
that, just as surely as this common
wealth lives, the people will SO ordain.
1t is possible that the people will pay
more heed than did the court to the
suggestion that, under the system of
voting now prevailing in Montana,
any judicial inquiry into the honesty
of the vote cast on election day is sub
ject to marked restrictions. AS we
understand II, the motive of counsel in
arguing this point was to make 1t APP
per that the man who fraudulently
votes should be punished, but the per-
son who, on the face of election re-
turns, appears to be elected, ought to
be placed without hindrance to the ex-
ercise of his official functions. This
view did not commend itself to the
courts favorable judgment. Indeed,
Judge Blake did not yield to any of
the considerations which would have
made his decision more acceptable to
the public by removing from it the Of
fensive flavor of partisanship. lie
might have considered the brief on
its merits and then have allowed an ap-
peal to the federal courts: he purposely
prevented this. lie might have ordered
a new trial: but that did not suit the
purpose of the republicans. He might
have ordered a jury trial, in the face of
what was held by the attorneys for Sui
Ivan: but that would have delayed the
installment of Lloyd, and we have no
doubt that Judge Blake desired to have
Lloyd promptly seated.
The result of il all Is that we have a
decision which half the people of Mon
tana, mt least. believe to be without
merit, because il did not pass on the is
sue presented and because the court
occupied itself with considerations re.
garding which il was bound, by the
very nature of things, to be partisan.
Other courts i'm other states, greater
courts in larger fields have arrayedthem-
selves against the people as the Montana
supreme court has by its recent decis-
ion. This country knows what II is to
see the most remarkable war of history
fastened by the unfair decision of the
highest judicial authority in the repub-
lie. This state will lend respectful
obedience to the decree of the court its
people have created, but it will yield
no jot of its convictions regarding
what is right and what is wrong, and il
will obey the behest of the court be-
cause IL knows that the wrong cannot
endure and because il is willing to sub
nit the issue with all that it involves
to the final arbitration of the common
people. Judge Blake has erred, but he
will live to see the people set him right.
Democrats in this state will certainly
not insult him. but they will rev erse
him.