Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1911-02-07
Judaeship Tanqle.

The threatened contest between the
governor and the chief justice Of the
supreme court, involving the authority
to appoint special judges to preside
over regular or special terms Of the
court has been averted, by the removal
of the issue.
Mr.. Duncan c. Ray, the lawyer des-
ignated by the Richland bar and rec
commended by the chief justice, declined
to serve, and Mr.. ]. F. j. Caldwell OF
Newberry, having previously announc-
ed the same purpose, there was no
longer any bone for contention.
After Messrs. Caldwell and Ray had
gotten out Of the way, the governor
advised the chief justice that he had
learned that Judge Watts was disen-
gagged, and the chief justice having
taken pains to assure himself Of the
correctness Of that fact, assigned Judge
Watts to the place in controversy.
AS was quite natural there has been
considerable little feeling over the
whole matter; but as to whether there
has been any just cause for feeling
there is room for considerable doubt.
From the course the whole affair has
taken, it appears that there was no in
tention on the part of anybody any
where to step on anybody's toes. For
instance, the governor explained that
he had selected his man before he was
aware that the chief justice had made
a recommendation, and Mr.. Caldwell
explained that he had agreed to accept
the appointment on the assurance that
the Columbia bar would be agreeable.
AS we see the whole thing, we can
not quite approve the sentiment eX-
pressed by the governor to the effect
that he would not appoint an enemy
where he could find friend who was
worthy or competent to fill the job.
Although not right anywhere, that sem
timent is permitted to a private citi-
zen; but is rather out of place in a
governor of the whole people. We are
inclined to hope that when he said
that, the governor did not exactly
mean it.
But we have not been inclined to side
against the governor in this matter.
We are rather disposed to think In
what he has done, if not in what he
has said, he is entirely defensible. AS
we have already explained we think
that the constitution contemplales that
these special judge appointments
should be made by the governor, and If
this be true, that authority and discre-
ton cannot be taken away by mere
act Of the general assembly.
Whatever else may be said of Gov
ernor Blease, he has proven through
long years Of actual practice that he is
the strongest parliamentarian in the
state. At least this is true so far as
our humble judgment goes, and the
record is open to show for itself.
1t is not surprising that such thor
ough parliamentarian should be a
great stickler for regularity, nor that
he should as governor, be extremely
jealous of his prerogatives, and accord
ing to our way of thinking in our view
of the case, we would not have blamed
him for making his own selection even
if he had been aware that the chief
justice had previously acted.
But as we have remarked, this issue
has not been settled. The ground of
contention has merely been removed by
the elimination of the conditions which
brought the issue about.
The question remains as much alive
as it has ever been, and we are in
clined to the opinion that it is liable
to break out in new place the very
next time there is another special judge
to appoint.
If friction is to be avoided next time,
it seems to us that it will be just as
we'll for the chief justice to consult the
pleasure of the governor and see if a
mutual agreement cannot be arrived
at in advance of announcements.