The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1899-08-11

saw SoInc tXsISClS LI0sE a AIt1ukuA
ful, able address by Judge A. p. Hum
pnrey, OF Louisville, KY, delivered be-
fore the Virginia State Bar Associa-
ton recently at Hot Springs. Va. He
IS described by a correspondent OF the
Richmond Times as much OF al orator
With a fine presence. The extracts were
appealing He spoke like a judge and
yet ne was no too partial perhaps 70
his calling He spoke Of judicial indie
pendence having been secured in the
trial of Judge Samuel Chase IN 1905.
He also said that executive indepen-
dence was TO be traced TO the trial Of
Andrew Johnson. To most people
with open eyes who are not seeing po-
htical events and the political trend
now through a glass darkly," the ten
dency at present is towards judicial
tyranny and usurpation, and toward
hdgh-handed tyranny and defiance OF
law and constitution On the the part Of
the executive. The people may well
watch the threatened dangers that lie
within their path and that of their coun-
try from these two threatening serious
| indications.
! A few years ago-two perhaps-an
, able address before the Georgia Bar
Association by a distinguished member
was upon Judicial Usurpation.' If We
recall. the theme correctly. We know
it was a strong presentation of the
tendency in the judiciary to invade
states and rule with a high hand.
Judge Humphrey evidently thinks that
there is nothing in the contention and
denies that the Federal judiciary has
the potency to erect ITSELF into an oligar
1 nhv ~ He COWS tho nrQuanfivo Eac urith
the people. His words are:
"And yet, it is true that all this is
at the will of the people; that the rep
resentatives and senators elected by
the people and the states can, at their
pleasure, emove every evil and destroy
every vestige of judicial power. The
same statement is true in reference to
enforcing the judgments Of these courts.
There is no power in the state so
dependent on the people as the judi
ciary."
If congress were composed of faith
full, true, liberty loving members, and
not spendthrifts and tima-servers and
weather-cocks, the bit could be put in
l the mouths OF the usurping federal jul
dietary. But as a matter of fact GER
tain of the federal judiciary nave "lord-
ed it over Gods heritage" and oppressed
the people, or they have have been
gravely slandered. If the United
States senate were all that a free peo-
pie should have it would guard the
country and save the people from all
outrages and wrongs charged against
the federal judges.
Judge Humphrey drew a strong
and impressive contrast between
Thomas Jefferson and John Marshall
with much felicity:
THE true rivals were 10Th of them
products Of u own soil-Thomas
Jefferson and John Marshall. Almost
at the same time the one became pres
ident; the other chief justice. The
dominant impulse of the one was the
freedom of the individual; the control
ling motive Of the other was the order
of society. The one feared anything
which seemed to restrict the local gov
eminent of the state in dealing with
matters Of local concern. The other
was determined that the central gov
eminent should have force enough to
at once protect it's own life and enforce
its lawful authority. 1 think it would
be difficult to measure which of these
men has had the larger influence. The
l OuS, IL SCtluS u lu6, uoS HIOoII IllucuCtu
the people; the other, the government;
the one, the individual; the other, So
ciety. If this is a just estimate, to
Jefferson belongs the crown, upon the
principle that the government is made
for the people, and not the people for
the government. At the same time,
liberty is worth nothing without order;
the individual is of no force without
society,""
No doubt, we suppose, Chief Justice
Marshall was the greatest mar who
has sat upon the United States supreme
court bench. He was in full sympathy
with Alexander Hamilton's strong gov
eminent ideas. It is well known that
Hamilton in Office relied upon Marshall
to give force and latitude to his plans
by judicial rulings. We have long be-
I lieved that Marshall was more respon-
sible for the centralizing tendencies Of
the federal government than even the
British Hamilton was. He helped to
fasten upon the country a system that
may yet end in either a centralized
power or a great national upheayal
Justice James Iredell of the same high
court, and a North Carolinian by
adoption though British born, was
much more of a genuine republican than
| Marshall was, and some of his opinions
are in happy and striking contrast to
those of Marshall. If the men of
strong government notions and p:inci-
| piles had been in permanent control
| from the start to 1920, We may not
. doubt, we would have had q govern
ment as complete an oliga:chy in pow
er, if not in name as England has
been in two hundred yeas. In truth
little Mckinley today exercises far
more power than G eat Britain allows
its queen to exercise. There are great
dangers threatening the people of the
United States. The present govern
ment is not the government ser up at
the beginning by the wise forefathers.
1t has been changed in many particu-
lars as has been set forth by at least
one competent writer, a distinguished
jurist. Mr.. Justice Pryor. Of New York
city. Watch then the leanings to usur-