Bisbee daily review., 1911-08-16

furnish a proper of measuring his fit for continuance In another term. On the instant of unpopular ruling, while the spirit of protest has not had time to cool and even while an appeal may be pending from his ruling in which he may be sustained he is to be haled before the electorate In a tribunal, with no ju- doial hearing, evidence or defense and thrown of office and dissraeed for life because he has failed, in single decision, it may be, to satisfy the populsr demand.
 Think Of the opportunity such system would give to interruptions political bosses in control, as they have been in control not only of conven- tions, but of elections. Think of the enormous power for evil given to the sensational, muck rakins portion of the press in arousing prejudice against just judge by false charges and insinua- tions, the effect of which In the short period os election by recall it would be impossible fer him to meet and offset.
 Supporters of such system seem to think will york only in the in,,.est of the poor, the humble, the weak and the oppressed; that it will strike down only the judge who is sup posed to favor corporations and be affected by the eorruPtins influence of the rich. Nothing could be further from she ultimate result The motive it would offer to unserupulous eembina- tions to seek to control politics in order to con troi the judges is clear.
 Those who will benefit by the recall are those who have the best opportunity Of arousing the majority of the people to action sudden impulse. Are they likely to be the wisest or the best people in a community? Do they in- clude those who have money enough to employ Girshrands and sIanderers in community, and the strrers up to social hats2 Would not self
  with such a sword of 0amocies hanging over thcm7
 What kind of judgments might the unpopular side expect from courts whose judges must make their decisions Under legslized terrorism? The character of the judges would deterorate to that of trimmers and time-servers and independent iu- dicaI action would be thing of the past.
 As the possibility of such system passes in review, is It too much to characterize 1t as one which will destroy the judiciary, its standing and it's usefulness?
 The argument has been made to justify the iu- dietary recall that t is only carrying the priu- cIpe of the election of the judges by the people The appointment by the exeoutive is by the rep resentative of the majority and So far future bias is concerned there is great difference be- tween the appointment and the election of judges. The independence of the judiciary is Secured rath- CT by fixed term and fixed and irreeucibe sal. ary.
 it is true that when the of judges is for limited number Of Years ard reelection is neces- sary it has been thought and charged Sometimes that shortly before election, in cases in which popular interest Is excited, judges have leaned in their decisions toward the popular side. As sI- ready pointed cut, however in the election of Iudses for ong and Hsed term of years ths fear Of popular prejudice a motive for unjust de hand while the opportunity which the people have calmly to consider the work of a judge for full term of years in deciding as to his reelection gen erally insorss from them fair and reasonable con sideration of his qualities g judge.
 While, therefore, there have been elected luaiee, or who have yielded to the power of po- Itieai bosses In their decisions, | am convinced that these are exceptional and that, the whole, elected judges have made great American judi ciary. But tine success Of an elective judiciary certainly furnishes for changing t1a system as to take away the very safeguards which have made t successful
 Attempt is made to defend the principle of ju cieaI recall by reference states in which udges said 10 have shown themselves to be under corrupt corporate influence and In which it is claimed that nothing but a remedy would suf fee. If the political control in such states is susff cientiy wrestec from eorruptins corporations so
 =