Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1910-09-06
Cnticising the Court.
To the Editor Of The Star:

To the Editor OF The Star:
VIII you give me space to express a
dissent from some of the views stated in
the editorial appearing in your Sunday
issue, entitled Respect for the Court?'
In this editorial. while conceding that
strictly individual criticisms of citizens"
Of court decisions are not likely to inflict
injury on judicial tribunals. you argue
that the judgments of the Supreme Court
should be accepted as final. especially
when those judgments involve construc-
lions of the Constitution. and inferen-
TALLY at least, you deprecate public crit
icism of all the determinations of that
ultimate source of judicial authority"
i venture to suggest that this is not a
sound position TO take. In this country,
more than in any other. is 1t vitality es-
sential TO the public welfare and safety,
that judicial utterances should be sub
jected TO the severest public scrutiny and
discussion, and especially Is this true In
cases where the organic charters. federal
and state are receiving construction at
the hands of the courts. For IL mus:
never be forgotten that IL Is within the
power of a single justice of the Supreme
Court. by the vote he gives in the deter
mination of case in which there is an
equal division of opinion among his col
leagues. to defeat the nations will. per-
haps but recently expressed in a congress
sional enactment. which this justice de-
clares is unconstitutional. And the power
TO do this, IL should also be remembered,
Is one assumed by the court, for ii has
never been expressly conferred upon IL.
Again. historically considered, the re-
verse of what you advise has been the
course in this country and in England
reforms. What more passionate outburst
of resentment and criticism does our his
tory reveal than that directed toward the
Supreme Court, when its decision in the
bred Scot case was announced? Does
The Star think that that decision should
have been accepted as final. because It
proceeded from the ultimate source OF
judicial authority. discordant as its
Would IL have been better for progress
and civilization IL the Judgment OF Lord
Chief Justice Mansfield. which denied. In
effect, freedom of speech and Of the press,
lent Wilkes had appeared to fling de-
fiance at the judgment seat?
Would II have been better IL the judg-
ments of another lord chief justice,
known in history as bloody Jeffreys"
rendered on a memorable occasion while
holding court on what was called the
western circuit. had been accepted as
final instead OF whole people criticising
them. and finally unseating him and driv-
ing his royal master from his throne and
Kingdom?
A decent respect for constituted author
ity Is a duty snjoined upon every citi-
zen. but where. as here. the people are
the ultimate source of all authority, ju-
diciel or otherwise IL behooves them, IL
they would conserve their liberties and
well being. never 10 forget that
80 Man, proud man.
Drest In a little brief authority
Plays such
Fantastic tricks before high heaven
As make the angels weep"
And finally, IL the right to criticise be
conceded is il not preferable to listen 10
the criticisms of those who, by a more
or less common consent are regarded as
best able 10 form and express accurate
opinions on the subjects criticised?
r. L. SIDDONS