The news & observer., 1901-03-27
WERE WE HoNEsT9

Some of the attorneys for the i'm
peached justices are fond of declaring
that the resolutions of impeachment
were offered for partisan purposes,
That statement originated with Pritch-
ard, Linney and Pearson and ought to
have died with them.
When the Legislature of 1899 had fin
ished it's labors, it did an unprecedented
thing. Instead of adiourning, it took
a recess until June 1900.
Why?
The answer is known Of all men. 1t
was because that body believed the Su-
preme court, if unchecked, would de-
clare the election law Illegal and pre-
vent fair vote on the Constitutional
Amendment That was the reason
given by every Democratic member of
that Legislature and was understood
by every voter in the state.
When the Legislature met in June,
1900, it passed an act which made it
ll4lpOcoipiC III IllC JOoSoCo w NiN'1tSS NAAN
election law or the amendment. 1t was
an unusual and drastic proceeding, and
would not have been adopted if the
whole Democratic party had not believ-
ed it was the settled purpose of the
Republicans to secure judicial aid in
their campaign. Senator Pritchard re-
Gently declared that such was their
purpose, but the act of June 1900 com
PEELED a change of programme.
Were the suspicious of the people of
the Supreme court we'll founded then?
If not, then they did 1 grievous wrong,
but nowhere in the State did solitary
Democrat say that they could trust the
fairness and inIpartiauty of the Supreme
court. On the contrary every one
agreed that it was essential for the Leg
islature never to adjourn sine die until
near the election, and recess was
taken four separate times before a
final adjournment,
Were we honest in this course? If
so, when did the impeached judges be-
come so non-partisan and just that, ac-
cording to MIR. Osborne, they are en-
titled to rank with Ruffin and Hen
derson and Taylor? at what moment
did the scales fall from their eyes?
Were the people honest when they ap
plauded Gov. Jarvis's statement: Il
would as soon put Breckinridge in
charge of a female seminary as to put
Furches on non-partisan Supreme
COURT" Or were we taking recesses,
criticizing these judges and forbidding
judicial control over. election officers for
campaign purposes2
So far as this paper is concerned it
believed every word of criticism and
condemnation uttered then. 1t was
honest in saying these men had con-
verted the court into an engine for fur
thering the success Of the Republican
party and into an elevator to lift men
of their faith into Office. We believe
usch to have been the dominating spirit
of the court from the day the Constitu-
tional Amendment was submitted. We
have said so for two years. The leaders
and speakers of the party have said so.
The people have long memories. They
cannot have confidence in party that
makes charges during a campaign and
afterwards say they were merely cam
paign thunder
If these two justices were not actual
ed by partisan motives the Legislature
of 1899 was a body OF unworthy men
who put a stigma upon that court for
which there cannot be too severe con-
demnation. We are not ready to admit
that what was said and done by the
Legislature of 1899 was wrong and un-
just, and the people are not ready to
admit it even if few attorneys do take
that view now.