New-York tribune., 1904-08-30
PARKER AND BRYAN.
Judge Did Not Dissent from I'm
constitutional Utterances.
To the Editor of The Tribune.

which its founders hope to promote the prospects
OF Judge Parkers candidacy in the present cam
paign, it is not conceivable that It can be matter
of indifference to those gentlemen to ascertain.
from concrete instances. how devoted ''constitu-
tionalist thai candidate himself has shown himself
TO be. The members of the club imply. from their
support of him, that he has always been exem-
plarily amenable to constitutional considerations
controlled by reverent regard for the great docu-
ment and for its principles, as plainly forth
and authoritativey construed. But let US con-
slider this for a moment in the light of we'll
known facts.
In his support, In 1886 and 1900, of the candidate
who proclaimed conspicuously and unqualifedly.
his desire to revolutionize our highest consttu-
tonal court he certainly gave encouragement to
this assault this revered tribunal. He pro-
claimed no dissent from the declarations OF the
platform, he administered rebuke the candi-
date for assertions his part emphatic
than the declarations of the platform itself. One
or the members OF the new club has recently dis
cussed in THE Yale Law Journal the consttu-
tional principles which Webster aided in establish
Ing by his great arguments before this highest
tional court. Webster. this member of the club
makes clear. brought to the task of expounding
our fundamental charter, which had been framed
and ratified not many years before he began his
career at the bar. a reverence such as few men
feel for charters and acts that have been created
almost under their own observation. His father
had been "Continentar soldier of distinction in
the ReVoutlon and patriotic sentiments had been
from his earliest years the inspiration of the house
hold In which he grew to manhood. Our friend of
the new club seems to have appreciated Webster's
services and been enamoured of his patriotism And
can he conceive that had he lived and been in
Judge Parkers place. he would, have refraned
from protesting against the revolutionary theories
concerning the court which Bryan proclaimed
and which views so far know from any
thing Judge Parker said had the present candi-
dates entire concurrence?
Albert Venn Dicey. in his LAW of the Consttu-
uon' says: The main why the United
States has carried out the federal system with un-
equalled success Is that the people OF the United
States are more thoroughly imbued with legal
ldeas than any other existing nation" These
words of this late eminent English barrister.
lecturer in the Ions of Court. Vinerian Professor
at Cambridge, convey a high compliment to the
Americans as a people. But Judge Parker.
considering his support of a. candidate whose de-
clared purpose was TO strip our highest expositor
OF the law OF part Of its authority and jurisdic-
tion. justly claim any share in the compliment?
Did not silence in this essentially disquafy
him for being Judge or President as The Even
Ing POST thought his silence in his 1903 speech at
the South. on certain burning questions, dis
qualified him for any office. executive or judicial7
But look. for moment, the other side of the
picture; and this turning from the silver side Of
the shield TO the golden ought to interest the
Constitutional Club. Another member of that body
In recent address quotes with approval words
spoken by the President at dinner given not long
ago 10 tne NeneraDle supreme Court Justice Judge
Harlan: For the judges of the Supreme Court of
the land must be not only great justices but they
must be great constructive statesmen and the
truth of what is Illustrated by every study OF
American statesmanship. For in not one serious
study Of American political life will II be possible
to omit the immense part played by the Supreme
Court in the creation not merely the modification
OF the great policies through and by means of
which the country has moved Its present
position"
An UlpD 1bprO Ofs sbo Crha tn, ho-
mony with the Presidents remarks on the broad
ened functions of the courtthat the view that the
court merely interprets the Constitution and that
everything that the court says is really in the Con-
stitution. lis most superficial. and cannot stand
analysis" He represents the President justly
recognizing the growth and the constructive func-
ton OF this tribunal-his concession 1t OF en-
larged powers-while. the other hand Judge
powers and the Judge impliedly,. by his unques-
uGning ard unqualified support favored & the cur
tho reason for its existence to be the apprehen-
dent will eIat the power Of the executive TO the
extent Of violating the Constitution and at the eS
legislative departments! How recently is 1t that
they have concluded, reversing President Cleve-
dition that confronts US? Obviously. the quotation
mark give emphasis to this Contrast. on this point
netween the views OF the two candidates; the
one and the narrowness of that held by the Demo-
But a more serious question arises in connection
with Judge Parker's support OF Bryan in 1900 At
made speech in Indiana q had The World s. re-
port port of IL in which he set out his views of our
was perhaps the most laborousy developed prop
reasoning Wss @ embodied in the decafaton OF ba nls
Spain had no title In the Philippines (and the
title of course. made no difference in his estima-
tion(; that as she herself had no title she could
rot have conferred any on us. and hence
nteToIPeIs I.e there mere gsurpers Obviously. that
S ineXOrabe
OF an Immediate evacuation-a summary with
possession to those entitled of right to 1.-THE
natives themselves
ness to fnd himself in possession of anything what
pulse; his mere instinct, If he were gentleman
would be to make haste to deliver 1t into that
prise this ob1ous coroaTy %as NOT
M sdd2ss by Mr. Bryan b d 5 2 M He in
he declared that II he were elected President his
e un pue Go er a1e OF ee s9
lished there We can imagine the scorn with which
on the other side who Should have Announced the
% saE T Mr. WITH Mha haze Ss weuS S
have denounced this evasion of a plain duty
be maintained forever for who could have been
Bryan,s statement M and the anttmperialists never
criticized this expressed Intention to perpetuate an
occupancy admitted to be illegal
word about II, as far as we know II he had any
sentiments or convictions the subject he
as silent concerning them he had been on the
subject of the gold standard at the time of his
nomination at St. Louis. when his intimate
friend and hacker, the who responsible
for him politically. the Sage of Elmira and VOL
fert's Roost. was completely ignorant of his views
Is 1t conceivable that man taking an intelli-
gent interest in great pending political struggle
he failed In 1900 to acquaint himself with views
of his 16 to candidate? Nor other point
Is IT conceivable that he was ignorant-the cand
curing the ratification of the treaty by which
took over the Philippines Senator Hoar charged
that when the treaty was up before the Senate its
ratification was secured-and could only have been
seCured-thrOuRh IasiOr hv, Er,yar ,oS