The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1910-02-02

|
| for the reason that the governor in
making such appointments would not
| be Influenced from political motives.
! but would act as he conceived for the
best interest of the state, and that
the Judiciary when appointed, would
have no political friends to favor or
enemies to punish.
| This view of the committee has in
support thereof, the. precept and eX-
ample of the democratic party in this
state for many years. So strongly
has this view been entrenched in
the minds of the people that in the
constitutional conventions of 1868 and
1885. it was embodied IN each of the
constitutions submitted to the people
and was ratified in each instance by
the people themselves. It was again
submitted to the people in 1902 when
the resolution providing for the amend
ment to Section s, Art. 5 came before
them for adoption. And again the
people saw the wisdom of taking
the judiciary from political scrambles
for office and made the Office of circuit
| Judge appointive rather than elective.
And this was subsequent to the enact
ment Of the primary law Of 1901.
| 1t seems to us, therefore, from the
constitutional provisions in force IN
| this state, that 1t was an erroneous
| act Of the state executive committee
to have ever placed the judiciary with
| IN the primary system. and that the
| present committee has only rectifed
wrong heretofore committed, and
stand in line not only with the con-
census of opinion of leading statesmen
as heretofore expressed in constitu-
tional conventions and also in line
| with both precept and example of the
/ great party in power in this state.
The action Of the committee has also
the sanction of the people themselves,
as expressed at the polls by secret
ballot on three different occasions in
the Publications of the constitutions OF
1858 and 1885. and in the adoption or
the proposed amendment to sections,
article 5, submitted to them in 1902
1t was not the belief Of the CON-
mittee that through the appointive
power, the judiciary would be abso-
lutely removed from political infiu-
ences. but it did believe that by elimi-
mating the judiciary from the primary
system that the chances were that
more effective, learned and consclen-
tious judiciary would be had, that the
temptations to be swer|ed from the
path of duty by reason of political
obligations to be paid would be more
| remote, and that the people of our be-
loved state would receive a more
fair, Just and impartial administration
of the law.
l have carefully given Section % of
| the democratic platform of 1900, adopt
ed by the convention held at that time,
| as well as section 33 thereof, and also
| the primary law Of 1901 cited by you,
my careful attention.
The platform adopted in 1900 was
enacted to cover the eXigencieS and
demands of the party as it then exist
| ed. In my opinion it was not the in
tention of the trainers of the platform
Or the convention which ADOPTED it to
make that platform the party law OF
this state forever law as unchange-
able as the laws of Modes and Per-
sias. On the contrary, times change
and we change with them. It seems
to the writer that in the adoption OF
| section % of the platform and section
SO thereof that it was the intention. OF
he convention to merely adopt a
method for the enactment of a pri-
mary law. and that after the enact
ment of the law that the functions OF
the platform embodied in those sec
tons were completely fulfilled.
In fact it is the opinion of the
writer that since the enactment of the
primary law of 1901, that section % of
| the platform mentioned has never
! been considered by the state demo-
cratic executive committee or any gov
ernor of this state, prior to your cleo
ton, as the party of this state. That
! this statement is correct there can be
no question when we consider the sec
ton of the platform itself in connec-
tion with the actions Of former state
executive committees and former chief
executes OF this state. Said section
among other things provides:
And we pledge the democracy to
the passage of all laws to that end.
| (referring to the primary election)
and instruct the democratic state exec
utive committee to provide for and
superintend the holding of and declare
and certify the results of such pri-
mary elections whenever it shall be-
come necessary by end of term, death,
resignation or otherwise to elect or
appoint any officer"
Since the adoption of this platform
now so strongly insisted upon by. GER
tain Of the press to be party law,
which the executive committee cannot
disregard without being charged with
having violated the StrLst imposed in
it. Have there not been vacancies
n the offices of judges of the supreme
court In the office Of attorney general,
in the Office of United States senator,
in several Of the judicial circuits of
this state, as to the Office of judge as
we'll as in the Office of states attor-
ney as we'll as other Offices both ap-
pOintiye and elective? Has the state
democratic executive committee under
the provisions Of section % Of the
platform of 800. ever been convened
for the purpose of ealing a primary to
fill such vacancies as required and in,
structed under the provisions quoted
Has any governor Of the state ever in.
sisted that the platform upon which
he was elected required such primary
before he would make the appointment
to fill such vanacies? Is il not a fact
that as TO each and all Of the offices
mentioned. when such vacancies have
occurred that the provisions of sec
ton % have absolutely been ignored
Are there not now persons holding