Arizona republican., 1910-11-04
PHOENIX, ARIZONA, NOV. 4. 1910.
The Independence of the Judiciary

The Independence of the Judiciary.
 Of all the nonsensical things pro posed in Arizonas constitutional con- vention, the provision to make judges subject to "the recall" is easily the most idiotic, from a practical stand point for nothing else would so surely make statehood impossible.
 The president of the United States is a great lawyer Three fourths of the members of the senate and house of representatives are lawyers.
 Every honest lawyer is deeply at tached to the principle of independ- ence of the judiciary. If lawyers of sense and integrity could have their way, the election of judges would be wholly separated from party politics. In the most progressive states long steps toward divorcing judiciary cleo tions from party politics have been taken
 The doctrine laid down by the great Chancellor Kent, more than fifty years ago. has the endorsement of every square lawyer:
 Tn mOnarchial governments the in- dependence of the judiciary is essen tial to guard the rights of the sub ject from the injustice of the crown; but in republics it is equally salutary in protecting the constitution and laws from the encroachments and tyranny of faction. Laws, however wholesome or necessary, are frequent ly the object of temporary aversion, and sometimes of popular resistance. It is requisite that the courts of jus tice should be able at all times to present a determined countenance against all licentious acts, and to deal impartially and truly, according to law, between suitOrs of every de- scription, whether the cause, the ques- ? ton or the party be popular or un- popular To give them the courage and the firmness to do it the judges ought to be confident of the security of their salaries and station. Nor is an independent judiciary less useful as a check upon the legislative power. which is sometimes disposed, from the force of party or the temptations of interest to make a sacrifice of con- stitutional rights; and it is a wise and necessary principle of our govern ment as will be shown hereafter in the course of these lectures, that leg isIative acts are subject to the severe scrutiny and impartial interpretation of the courts of justice, who are bound to regard the constitution as the paramount law and the highest evidence of the will of the people"
 ITO give them the courage and the firmness to do it'-to deal impartially and truly. according to law. between suitors of every description, whether the cause, the question or the party be unpopular-"the judges ought to be confident of the security of their salaries and station"
 No more incisive indictment of "the recalr' could be drawn. Chancellor Kent, in the famous words we have quoted. of course did not dream of the possibility of the recall" He had in mind merely the insecurity of sal ary and station caused by making a judge a suppliant to politicians for his position. The great chancellor would have found difficulty. we imagine, in expressing with sufficient force the obvious objections to the making of judges the constant victims of popular prejudice and passion by means of "the recall"
 If it were possible for Arizona to put "the recalr' in force against the judges of our courts, it would be speedily learned that the only as- pirants for the bench would be found among the few crooks of the legal profession-an honest lawyer could not afford to take the job, for he would know that the performance of his duty on the bench would inevi- tably subject him to the annoyances and burdensome expenses of attempt ed recalls" initiated by dissatisfied Iitigants and shyster attorneys.
 Is it possible that there is in the convention a delegate of even ordi- nary intelligence who can bring him. self to think that President Taft or the lawyers in either house of con- gress would approve "the recall of judges as a part of our constitution? :?