The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1911-08-15
PRESIDENT vEToEs STATE
HOOD MOTION OF CONGRESS
tcoatlnuea IRON Page one,

|idusl, and 10 preserve our constl'
uticnal balance, we must have
|ldges with courage to decide against
he majority when law and Justice
equire.
Gould there be a system more In
teniously devised 10 subject judges
b momentary gusts of popular pas.
ior than this Arizona system? Con
roversies over elections labor trou-
les, racial or religious issues. issues
Is to the construction or constitu.
onaiity of liquor laws, criminal
rials OF popular or unpopular de-
endnnts, the removal of county seats,
|dfts by individuals to maintain their
Constitutional rishts In obstruction By
omc popular Improvement these
nd many other cases could be cited
b which q majority OF district cleo
prate would be tempted by hasty AIT
Ter to recall q conscientious judse
opportunity were open all the time
70 period of delay Is interposed for
BIC abatement OF popular feeling. The
ecall 10 devised to encourage quick
ction and to lead the people 10
rtike while the iron is hot.
Supporters of such system seem
b think that II would work only In
le interests OF the poor, humble,
he weak and the oppressed; that II
Yin strike down only the Judge who
supposed TO favor corporations and
p affected by the corrupting infiu-
nee of the rich. Nothing could be
|lrther from the ultimate result. Tho
hotive II would offer to unscrupulous
om binations to seek TO control poll
les In order to control the Judges is
lear. Those would profit by the re-
ull who have the best opportunity
II rousing the majority Of the PEG.
lie TO action on a sudden impulse. Do
hey not include these who have
honey enough to employ irebrands
nd slanderers In community and
he stirrers-up of social hate?
Would not self-respecting men
Iell hesitate 10 accept judicial officc
nth such q sword OF Damocles hang
hg over them? What kind OF tudg-
isnts might those on the unpopular
ide expect from courts whose
kltges must make their decisions I'M
cr such iegalized terrorism? The
haracter OF the judges would dc
eriorate to that OF trimmers and
ime-servsrs, and independent judi
ial action would be thing OF the
|ast AS the possibilities OF such a
ystem pass In review. is II too much
b characterize IL as one which will
Destroy the judiciary, Its standing,
b usefulness
1T Is said the recall will be rare
N used II so, IL will be rarely need
ID. Then why adopt system SO
ull OF danger? But II is mistake
b suppose that such powerful leN
r for influencing judicial decisions
md such an opportunity for ven.
eance because of adverse ones, viii
Dc allowed TO remain unused
But II IL said that the people OF
arizona are to become an independ-
nt state when created, and even If
Fo strike out judicial recall now,
hey can reincorporate IL in their
Constitution after statehood.
ITO this would answer that Ia
ealing with the courts, which are
he cornerstone OF good government,
inc In which, not only the voters.
lt the nonvoters and nonresidents
ave q deep interest, as a security
On their rights OF life, liberty am
property, no matter what the future
elton Of a state may be. IL IL nee
ssary for the authority which Ia