Waterbury evening Democrat., 1908-12-08

.ux vu rne merits Of the order should be had within . short fixed period. and if not then continued after hear ing 1t should forthwith lapse, Deci- sions should be rendered immediately and the chance of delay inlnimized in every way. Moreover. I believe that the procedure should be sharply de- fined and the judge required minuteiy to state the particulars both of his action and of his reasons therefor, 50 that the congress can, if it desires. ex' anime and investigate the same.
 The chief lawmakers of our country may be and often are the judges, be. cause they arc the final seat of au. thority. Every time they interpret con tract. property. vested rights, due process of law. liberty, they necessarily enact into law parts of a system of social philosophy, and. as such inter- pretation is fundamental, they give direction to all lawmaking. The de- cisions of tho courts on economic and social questions depend upon their economic and social philosophy. and for the peaceful progress of our peo- pie during the twentieth century we shall owe most to those judges who hold to Q twentieth century economic and social philosophy and not to long outgrown philosophy which was itself the product of primitive econom- ic conditions. Of course a judges views on progressive social philosophy arc entirely second in importance to his possession of a high and fine char acter, which means &he possession of such elementary virtues as honesty, courage and fair mindedness. The judge who owes his election to pander- ing to demagogic sentiments or class hatreds and prejudices and the judge who owes either his election or his appointment to the money or the favor of 6 great corporation are alike un- worthy to sit on the bench, are alike traitors to the people, and no pro- fundity of legal learning or correctness of abstract conviction on questions of public policy can serve as an offset to such shortcomings. But it is also true that judges, like executives and legis- lators, should hold sound views on the questions of public policy which are of vital interest to the people.
 The legislators and executives are chosen to represent the people in en- acting and administering the laws. The judges are not chosen to represent the people in this sense. Their func. ton is to interpret the laws. The legis- lators are responsible for the laws, the judges for the spirit in which they in- terpret and enforce the laws. We stand aloof from the reckless agitators
 who would make the judges mere pll- ant tools of popular prejudice and pas sion, and we stand aloof from those equally unwise partlsans of reaction and privilege who deny the proposi. lion that, tnasmuch as judges are chosen to serve the interests of the whole peo- pie, they should strive to find out what those interests are and, SO far as they consclendously can. should strive to give effect to popular conviction when deliberately and duly expressed by the lawmaking body. The courts arc to be highly commended and stAnchly up- held when they set their faces against wrongdolng or tyranny by . majority, but they are to be blamed when they fail to recognize under . government Like ours the deliberate judgment of the majority as to . matter of legiti- mate policy when duly expressed by the legislature. Such lawfully ex- pressed and deliberate judgment should be given effect by the courts save in the extreme and exceptional cases where there has been 8 clear violation of a constitutional provision. Any thing like frivolity or wantonness In 1psetting such clearly taken govern mental action is grave offense against the republic. To protest against tyrnn- ny, to protect minorities from oppres- sion, to nullify an act committed In a spasm of popular fury, is to render 8 service to the republic. But for the courts to arrogate to themselves fupc- tons which properly belong to the leg islative bodies is all wrong and in the end works mischief. The people should not be permitted to pardon evil and slipshod legislation on the theory that the court will set it right They should
 be taught that the right way to get rid of bad law Is to have the legislature
 repeal It and not to have the courts by
 ingenious hair splitting nullify 1t. A law may be unwise and improper, but 1t should not for these reasons be de. clared unconstitutional by q strained
 Interpretation. for the result of such action Is to take away from the people at large their sense of responsibility
 and ultimately to destroy their capac- ity for orderly self restraint and self
 government Under such popular government as ours, founded on the
 theory that in the long run the will of
 the people is supreme, the ultimate
 safety of the nation can only rest in training and guiding the people so that what they will shall be right and not
 in devising means to defeat their will
 by the technicalities of strained con. struction.
 For many of the shortcomings of