The evening times. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1906-1914, 1906-10-01
NON-PARTISANSF3IP
IN THE JUDICIARY

The Grand Forks Herald of recent
date has anextended article upon non-
craftsmanship in the judiciary of the
state and the wisdom of disregarding
party lines in naming at least enc of
the supreme justices of the state. H.
support Of its contention the Herald
quotes with approval the opinion of
"a recent supreme Justice of the
state" who holds that the presence of
one democrat would be salutary be
couse In the decision of political cases,
which frequently come before the
court. a decision rendered by three
republican justices would render the
court liable to popular suspicion OF
political prejudice and bias, whereas
decision rendered by two republican
and one democratic Judge would clear
the court of any imputation of politi-
cal prejudice in the rendering of a
decision.
Now we cannot admit the Herald's
contention, or even the contention of
the former Judge which is cited, to be
true. We do not believe the unan-
imous decision of the highest tribunal
In the state upon even political ques-
ton would under any circumstances
justify the inference that political bias
was back of the decision, nor do we
believe such an inference or suspicion
would be harbOred by the people of
the state or any considerable number
of them. If, on the other hand, how
ever, case having political bearing,
should be decided by a majority of
two republicans with one democrat
dissenting-and such a decision is in
all things probable upon purely legal
and logical reasoning on the part of
the judges and without any political
sentiment at all-then it would much
more strongly justify an inference
that the decision was the result of a
perhaps unconscious working of politi-
cal belief. We do not remember that
the supreme court of this state. which
has always been republican,. has ever
been accused of rendering political
decision in the sense that any decis-
ion was rendered for the political adj
vantage of one faction OR one party or
another But We do know that the
supreme court of the state. in the mat
ter of factional difference. has put
the determination Of regularity and
factional controversy with the party
organizations of the different parties,
where we believe it properly belongs
We do not believe the Judge who was
quoted would admit for moment that
in rendering any decision he has been
influenced by anything other than the
law as in his best judgment he has
been able to interpret it. Nor do We
think it fair to assume that any other
judge will be less mindful OF his
oath of Office and his duty as Judge
Nor do We thing 1t is fair to assume
that any great number of people will
meanly attribute to the court the
presence of political bias in the minds
of judges in rendering decisions. The
people are pretty good judges of the
merits of decisions and of the honesty
of judges. We do not believe setting
aside altogether the question OF
whether nonpartisanship is an ideal
condition in the court, that the people
in republican state need the pres
ence OF democratic Judge to con-
vince them of the recititude of the
court, nor the presence of a republican
judge in democratic state for the
same purpuose. But we do believe that
it is of distinct disadvantage to seek
to convince people that a court is to