The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1901-07-17


ting their employment, although they are liable to be dis
chaged by their employers at any hour thus creating and
|perpetuating state of slavery
There is danger that the people will these things
all at their enrobed judges doing their thinking
lon the side of the rich and powerful them look with
solemn cynlcls upon the suterngs OF the masses nor
heed the earthquake, when begins to roll beneath their
feet them present spectacle not unlike that OF Nero
lhddling while Rome burns.
There is danger that the people will all this at
sudden glance and that the ues will then break loose
and that all hell will ride on their wings.'
The views of Judge Thompson, we'll as the decs-
ions giving rise his criticisms fully set forth in
his address before the Bar Association of Texas and pub
lished in No. VOL xxx of the American Law Review
Prof. Burgess in political Science and Comparative
Constitutional Law" says There is provision in the
constitution of the United States any than in the
constitutions of other States England France and Ger
many which clothes the judiciary with power to declare
an act of the Legislature generally null on
of it's repugnance to the constitution any other &C
count. . . I do not hesitate to call the govern
mental system of the United States the arstocracy of the
robe and do not hesitate to this the
arsocracy for thes purposes OF government winch the
world has yet provided
Three of the Presidents of the United States
fully resisted the Federal tribunals when attempting to in
terere with executive, viz Jefferson, Jackson and Lincoln
the last of whom in his inaugural address said
II do not forget the position assumed by some that
constitutional questions to be decided by the Supreme
Court do deny that such decisions must be binding
lin any case upon the parties to suit to the object OF
that suit while they also entitled to very high respect
and consideration in all parallel by all other depart
ents of the government and while it is obviously posi-
bic thatsuch decision may be in any given cas
still the evil effect following it, being limited to that parc-
ular case with the chance that it may be overued and
become precedent for other cases. better be
borne than could the evils of different practice AT the
time the candid citizen must confess that if the pol
icy of the upon the vital questions affecting the
Lloo Nf
the Supreme Court the instant they made as in ordl-
nary litigation between parties personal actions the Peo-
pie will have ceased to be their masters unless having
that extent practically resigned their government into
the hands of that eminent tribunal"
Thomas Jefferson said: 1T has long been my opinion
that the germ of dissolution, of Federal government
in the constitution of the Federal judiciary rrespon-
sbe body working like gravity by day and by night gain
ing little to-day and little and advancing its
noiseess step like thief, the field of Jurisdiction
until all shall be usurped from the States, and the govern
ment of all be consolidated into one."
One of the criticisms strenuousy urged against this
Court is its inconsistency Perhaps the most conspicuous
illustrations of its inconsistency to be found IN the
Income Tax Cases. and the avalance of recent decisions
practically overrulng Norwood Baker, the orlty OF
the Court holding that OF the cost OF
improvement made arbitrarily according to the front
foot is violation of the Constitution OF the United
States for failure to provide any hearing review thereof
which the property owner can show that his property
beneed OF the assessment
the apporonment of the entire cost of street pavement
upon the abutng lots according to their frontage without
any preliminary hearing to benefits may be authorized
by the legislature and this will constitute taking OF
property without due process of law.
When these criticisms, emanating from high
sources and many others far bitter against Court
whose members entitled to hg hest respect and who
have by their undoubted ability shed ustre throughout the
judicial world, we naturally ask, what is wrong.
After long and careful consideration of this question:
have reached the conclusion that the evil lies the fact
that the members of this Court practically free from
accountability, and, being far removed from all contact
with the people, unconscously Influenced by their sur
roundngs and become sympathzes with the wealthy and
powerful.
If we are right in diagnosis that the fault lies in
the SYSTEM the question naturally arises what shall be the
remedy One remedy that has been suggested is to cur
tail the jurisdiction of the Court except to those sub
ecs which jurisdiction is conferred by the Consu-
tion, by amending the Judiciary Act, especially by
repeal of that provision allowing writ of error to the
State Courts Another suggestion is to elect the Chief JUS
tce in the manner in which the President is elected
that the Associate Justices should be elected by dividing
the United States into the same number of divisions as
there are Associate Justices of the Supreme Court allow
ing Associate Justice to each DIVISION, and IN such
that only part of the seats should be filled at any
one election We satisfied that permanent relief can
only from amending the Constitution so as to make
the tenure of office only for number of years. instead OF
during good behavior. We would suggest that they be
elected for term Of years. member OF the court
be elected every year the House of Representatives.
This would give the people opportunity to make the
and would be check that department of the govern