The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1891-05-17
STATE AND FEDERAL JUDGES.

In q thoughtful and interesting article on
State and Federal judges, which appeared IN
the last number Of the Virginia Law Journal.
S. s. p. Patteson, Esq, of the Richmond Bar,
advances a number Of important reasons why
the provision of the Constitution of 1851 with
reference to the election of State judges by
the people should be re-enacted.
The leading principle upon which this
former regulation in the administration of our
State affairs was based-namely, that the
people are the source of all forms of power
is also brought forward by Mr.. Patteson in
support of the proposition that the Federal
Judges of lower rank than those occupying
seats on the bench of the Supreme Court,
shall also be elected directly by the people in
stead of being appointed, according to the
law now in operation, by the President with
the consent Of the Senate.
Regarded from the point Of view Of this
principle, which is the very essence of popu-
lar government in all its different branches,
it is hardly open to dispute that the popular
election of judges, both State and Federal is
more consistent with the spirit of our in
situations than legislative election. The
manner in which the Federal judges whose
circuits and districts have been situated in
the South, have, since the war, exercised the
powers with which they have been invested
has illustrated only too clearly the wrongs
that can be inflicted by judicial appointments
originating in the presidential will and pre-
ference and not in the voice of the people
who are directly interested in the character
and conduct of these Federal judges.
If for the last generation the judges who
have occupied seats on the Federal bench in
the Southern circuits and districts had been
selected by the popular vote of these circuits
and districts, the odium which has only too
often invested our local Federal judicial
Offices would have been unknown, and in
stead OF being considered as the mouthpieces
and instruments of a prejudiced and tyranni-
cal central power these iudgeships would have
been looked upon and Justly so, as the bull
wark Of popular liberties and local rights.
The principle of popular election of Fed
eral Judges has foundation not only in the
DRY, but in practice, that commends it to more
careful consideration than the popular cleo
ton Of State judges. The area Of State IS
comparatively contracted; it is not likely
to be divided up into sections with an
tagonstic interests its people are iden-
tilted in feeling and character. The governor
and legislature of a single commonwealth
are much more united in sympathy with all
the people whom they represent than the
President and Senate Of the United States are
with the population of our whole country. 1t
follows, therefore. that the voters of State
can, as a rule. more safely delegate the power
TO elect their judges TO their representatives
in the legislature.
LISA delegated power which can be promptly
withdrawn by the proper constitutional pro-
vision if it is grossly abused. and it is power
that will probably be withdrawn in Virginia
as soon as there has been a more distinct ap-
Proclamation to that condition Of great
material prosperity which we observe in the
leading commonwealth of the North Circum-
stances peculiar to the period of our local his
tory through which we are still passing, have
constituted the principal cause for the pro-
longation of the right invested in our Legisla-
ture to elect our judges. and taking every
thing into consideration the present method