The Marietta journal. [volume] (Marietta, Ga.) 1866-1909, 1900-05-17
A MELANGE OF
LIVE TOPICS
Penned for journal Readers
by a Local Scribe.
Judicial Appointments.

The manner of the appointment of
the public officers of a commonwealth
has been the subject of variety of
changes and experiments in most
of the states of the union. In New
England alone has the democratic
idea OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS elections
been from the first the rule of cor
porate conduct. South Carolina, on
the other hand, has been the farthest
removed from that idea, nearly, if not
all the officers of that state, except
members of the general assembly and
federal congress, who were elected by
the people, being appointed by the gov
ernor or elected by the legislature.
Even the governor, as late as fifty years
ago, was elected by the law making
body.
There can be no doubt but that the
appointment of most functionaries
should be by popular elections. The
officers, have only ministerial duties to
perform and are consequently more
truly the representatives of the people
than are the judiciary, who not only
apply but construe the laws, being
kind of arbiters between the people in
their original capacity and the people
as represented by their agents, the leg
islature.
Purely ministerial officers should be
as near the people as possible, they are
but servants of the people and should
be directly accountable to them for
their official conduct. The masses are
also better qualified to Judge as to the
efficiency and worthiness of such Off
GERS than they are of the judiciary.
But it seems to me that the judges
of the state, supreme and circuit, and
the solicitors general should receive
their appointments in manner other
than by popular choice. A Judge is
representative of justice which is blind,
and his office should be kept free of the
political idea involved in popular cleo
tions that there must be a quid pro
quo. To engage in wrangle on the
stump us two candidates are doing in
South Georgia and two in an adjoining
circuit, is not calculated to highly i'm
press the people withIthe majesty of
the law.
All three OF the methods for filling
these places, elections by the people,
appointments by the governor and cleo
tions by the Legislature, have hereto
fore been tried in this state, and in the
light of results there is but little doubt
but that the second plan is the best.
This method has been successfully
practiced by the federal government
for more than century, notwithstand-
ing the life tenure of office of these
judges, feature which tends to make
them too self-willed and autocratic.
With six-years term this objection
would not apply to the state judges
and the governor (who generally has
plans for the future) being responsible
for his appointment, would not proba-
bly, make bad ones or ones displeasing
to the people.
The plan of electing judges and So
licitors by the Legislature is possibly
worse than by electing them by the
people. 1t consumes a very large pro-
portion of the time of the general as
sembly which should he devoted to the
law making function and the facilities
for combinations are so great that none
who do not belong to the combination
can ever hope to win, and it after forces
upon the state men in no way qualified
for the positions.
Will not some wide-awake member
OF the next general assembly introduce
bill to repeal this section of the con-
stitution and make the judges and So
licitors appointive by the governor?
~