Manchester Democrat. [volume] (Manchester, Iowa) 1875-1930, 1911-10-18
EDITOR MURPHY AND THE RE
CALL OF JUDGES.

graph Herald. Mr.. Lewis Murphy,
does not agree with some of the po-
sitions taken in our editorial Of last
week relative to the recall OF judges.
While quite agreeing with us that
the people OF this country will new
er place their government in jeopardy
by becoming mob, Mr.. Murphy dis
cusses the question from his stand
point as follows:
at is not proposed to go outside the
constitution to secure the recall OF
judges. The reform can't be secured
that way. Every state and the ma
@tional government would have to go
about it in the same way-by amend
ing the constitution To do this, twc-
thirds Of the electorate must approve.
This approval given, wherein would
there be invasion of the minority's
rights?
Judges subject to the recall the
Major fears for the minority's rights.
His thought is that judge would
not SO interpret the constitution as.
to give. oftense to the majority which
could recall him and that consequent
" there would be denial to the mi
$nority OF its constitutional rights. In
other words, the Majors fear is OF
the people is unwilling to trust
]; them to be fair and just and right.
y Rather than trust them to deal Justly
.by the minority he would trust a
4 Judge.
!; What means Of relief from constitu'
Il tional interpretations by the courts
exalting property at the expense OF
human rights does Major Carr pro
pose? How would he restrain tbs
Supreme Court from doing what il
4 did in the Tobacco and Oil
4 trust, cases-usurping a legislative
function OF government? Major
q Carr knows as a lawyer and stu
dent that under the constitution and
the laws we are powerless to restra:n
the Supreme Court in, any course II
elects to pursue. 1t took the Civil
War to recall the bred Scott decision
Major Carr will not assert that it Is
beyond the power Of the Supreme
Court to make this government a
Judicial oligarchy, even though h
I may deny that it is today a judicial
oligarchy or that it is likely to be.
R come one.
We fail to see that there is any
warrant in democracy as Jefferson
taught it for reposing greater faith II
NJ the wisdom, patriotism and unselfish
ness OF a majority of a court Of nine
men than in. the American people. IL
1t is quite true that whenever our
constitution is amended SO as to pro
vide for the RECALL Of judges the
minority will have no legal reason to
complain. Whenever two-thirds OF
the people of this country desire to
change our organic law, or any other
law, the change should be made and
the change will be made, and made
in; the mode provided forAby the con.
stitution.
The argument that those who op-
pose the recall of judges are unwil-
ling to trust the people applies to ev-
eryone who believes in constitu-
tional form of government.
II the people can be trusted i'm
plicity what use is there for constitu-
tons? Are not constitutions adopted
largely for the purpose OF placing
limitations upon the natural liberty
and human will Of majorities?
There were weak judges and unjust
judges in the days when the Saviour
Of mankind was here upon this earth,
and during all of the years which
have since elapsed. The question
under consideration is how can such
judges be best removed from official
positions The constitutions of the
United States and of the several
states provide for their impeachment.
The constitution OF United STATES
provides that all civil OFFICERS OF tine
federal government can be impeached
for treason, bribry and other high
crimes and misdemeanors." This
house of representative, prepares the
articles of Impeachment which cor
respond somewhat to an Indictment
h., . ,.,ad ;,r,, on<7 tba dofondan+ ic