New-York tribune., 1905-12-02
cRIrLcrSM OF JUDGES.

Mr. Austen G. Fox, in letter TO Inc 1rlpune'
published yesterday announces that he Is pre-
nared to follow up his criticism of the judiciary
at the City Club dinner He did not join, on
tuesday night. in the wholesale denunciation
which Mr. Jerome uttered. but confined him
self to speaking of the political ties of some
iudges which would have forbidden him to
take the election cases before them in expectl-
ton of a fair decision. Mr.. Fox says he VIII
offer a resolution at the first opportunity al Il
Bar Association meeting ION the subject of the
continuation of political activity by judges anu
'fts effect of uniting them for impartial con-
"sideration of cases involving directly organI-
cations of political nature" If he thus
backs up what he said and exposes the unJu-
diciaI conduct of political judges, he will not
merely Justify himself, but deserve gratitude
1t remains for Mr.. Jerome to justify his much
more sweeping remarks and show the pubic
what Judges are unworthy of even common
ordinary respect" and what specific conduct
has made them so unworthy If he knows, as
he intimates that certain judges, because OF
poltical or financial entanglements render cor
rI1pt judgments, he should make that knowl-
edge public He should put before the people
so that it will attract attention, as anything he
saws viii do a statement Of the TRANSACTIONS
which interfere with judicial duty.
we all know that judicial nominations come
from political organizations and that asp1rants
ask for them from party managers we 90
not know that such asking in general uanscends
the bounds of propriety or involves any as
graceful obligation. If Mr. Jerome knows OF
any such case, he should do more than hint at IT,
He must see that he has said too much or done
too little Almost all the newspapers including
his most enthusiastic admirers, advise him that
an attack upon the character Of our courts by
high officer of the court can be justified only II
if is SO supported in detail as to force reform
Mere general denunciation undermines popular
trust in the administration of justice without
improving it. The only exception among the
newspapers is 1.-The New-York Evening POST,
which declares that "the facts which were
alluded to by Mr.. Jerome are known to all
but 1t takes particular care not to sci down IN
cold type with the names of the offending
Judges. these facts known to al" It talks
about political contributions, naming some
iudges. and about election methods, but it IS
charv about declaring any particular judge cor
r1Ipt or unworthy of respect because OF them
OF course we all know about the bad system
of tying the judiciary up to party pollucs, Dut
Mr. Jerome went further than to denounce the
system He declared that certain judges We're
unworthy of respect and not to be trusted for
honest judgments. and he failed to name them
or distinguish from them the honest judges VINO
he admits are found upon the bench, but who
ara mi under the suspicion of those who hang
admiringlv on Mr. Jeromes words. He has not
criticised conditions but attacked some mem
bers Of a whole class of men, njuring the IN
nocent without taking measures TO expose or
punish the guilty.
we do not share the notion that the judiciary
is beyond criticism, but censure should be den-
nite We have frequently had occasion to crltl-
else not merely prevailing methods. but speclnc
acts of Judges and we have always tried 70 DO
it with particularly. Two years ago we criti-
cised Justice Bischoff for whom, in general, we
have great respect for his large political con-
tribution to Tammany while running for re-
election without opposition We have spoken
critically of the contribution made this year by
Judge Newburger, when it was not needed for
any expense incident TO his candidacy we
sharply expressed our disapproval of some Of
Recorder Goffs methods in the Molineux trial,
and have ever felt it duty TO bring judges by
name to the bar of public opinion when their
acts seemed to warrant it. That also is Mr..
Jeromes duty When the people Of the 5th
District had reason TO complain Of Justice
Wright they made public his exact offence and
secured his retirement from the bench. Those
who thought Justice Hookers conduct united
him for the bench likewise came out into the
open and sought to establish their case. If Mr..
Jerome has reason to believe most of the judges
in this district to be Influenced corruptly and
unworthy of respect he should take a similar
course Unless and until he is prepared thus to
sustain his declarations he has no right to
charge Judges with dishonesty, however fully
justified he may be in preaching against the
bad system under which they have been chosen.