The Columbia herald. [volume] (Columbia, Tenn.) 18??-1935, 1899-08-11

THE JUDGES MUST GO,
The Supreme Court has sustained
he Legislature, and the Democratic
party has redeemed its platform
pledges.
Ii will be remembered that the
Democratic party In thiA State In its
last declaration of principles, adj
dressed itself particularly TO State
affairs; that It boldly attacked GER
tain abuses and promised reform.
Among other things 1t declared as
follows:
"That a careful estimate of the work
in each Judicial Circuit and Chancery
division be made to the end that 1t may
be ascertained which of our judges are
doing less work than they are able to
do, To the end that the State may be
properly redistricted and the number
of Judges end Attorneys eneral re-
duced."
On this platform a Democratic
Legislature was elected, and they
devoted themselves earnestly and
actively to the work OF reform.
They made laborious investiga-
ton of the work done by the judicial
officers, and found that there were
as many as six Judges and Chancel-
lors, and five Attorneys. General,
whose services were not needed
and, therefore, in keeping with their
promises to reduce the number of
Judges and Attorneys.G General,
these courts and officers were abol-
ished.
There was serious question of the
power of the Legislature to do this.
In addition to the act abolishing
these courts, the Legislature, to be
sure of Its work as it thought. re-
moved these officers by concurrent
resolutions, under another provision
of the constitution.
OF course these questions were
Immediately brought before the
courts. The first case originated in
Henderson county, involving the
Eleventh Criminal Circuit, presided
over by Judge John NJ. Taylor. The
second case went up from Memphis,
involving the Second Chancery
Court, presided over by Chancellor
Lee Thornton. These were heard
together about six weeks ago in the
Supreme Court at jackson, and last
Tuesday the court delivered its
opinion.
There were two questions before
the court, the validity of the acts
abolishing the courts, and the
validity of the resolution removing
the Judges. On both of these ques-
tions the court divided, but the ma
jority opinion held, lst, that under
the removal clause of the constitu-
ton, the Legislature cannot remove
"a Judge except for causes personal
to himself, falling short of such as
would warrant his impeachment; ;
or, in other words, under this re-
moval clause a judge cannot be re-
moved for economic reasons or other
such grounds of public policy.
The Chief Justice, Snodgrass, and
Associate Justices McAlister, Beard
and Caldwell, concur on this point.
Judge Wilkes dissents.
2ud. That the act abolishlng the
Courts were constitutional, and that
. the result was that the Judges and
Attorneys-General went with their
Courts. On this point Judges Nc
Alister. Wilkes and Caldwell con-
cur, and Chief Justice Snodgrass
, and Judge Beard dissent.
r Thus, while it is unfortunate tha'
the Court was not unanimous, it will
5 be gratifying to the great mass o
3 people to know that the Suprem,
E Court sustains the law.
4 1t vindicates the wisdom of The
' democratic party. 1t establishes re
form. 1t gives force ana effect &c
the voice of the people. 1t make
$ the people, through their repre-
n sentatives, the supreme power il
q the State, and this is properly wher,
!, the supreme power ought co b.
i lodged. This decision will encourage
;, the people to know that reform i
e possible. 1t will weaken the lob
}, byists to know that useless officers
5 are not protected by the constitu
9 ton.
e 1t gives stability to the law. 1
It gives hope to the people. 1t give
= courage to the party-confidsnc
and satisfaction to all.
q IT is dollars to doughnuts that tn
.