The Washington times., 1912-02-21
)LONEL ROOSEVELT DECLARES FOR PROGRESSIVE POLICIES

special or otherwise, as might be de-
cided. aud after the fullest oppcrtunity
fCl elaboration and debate. the aIIos-
ton whether or not the Judges inter
probation OF the Constitution Ia to I've
sustained IL II In sustained, well and
good III not. then the popular verdict
is 10 be accepted as final, the decision
IL TO be treated as reversed. and the
construction OF the Constitution definite
" decld sd-subject only to action by the
Supreme Court of the United States.
Challenges Contention.
Many eminent lawyers who more or
less frankly disbelieve in our entire
American system OF government for.
by, and Of The people. violently antago-
nize this proposal. They celieve, and
sometimes assert, that the American
people are not i.ted Cor popular gcv-
eminent, and that IT Is necessary TO
keep tn" judiciary 'indepcud, mt If tl"
y ajoritY or of all the people," that
there must be no appeal TO the people
from the decision of a court in any case:
ana that. therefore. the judges are to
ne established as sovereign Iulers over
All lho5r who hold such position.
ltStrd II Is a complete nCGation OF our
whole system Of government: and II u
became the dominant position in this
country. Il would mean the absolute
llpseltiny Of both The rights and the
Iuic OF he people. II the American
, lnoIt arr not NJ for popular govern
the servants and not the masters of the
men whom they themselves put in Of
nee, then Iincoln's work Was wasted
upon which this great democratic repub-
lie rests IS failure. / believe, on the
cont airy. will all nv heart that the
American people are 1T for complete
all 1ur failures and shortcomings, we
OF this republic have more nearly real
lied than any other people on earth the
Ideal of Justice attained through genuine
popular rule. The position which these
eminent lawyers take and applaud is
| OF necessity a condemnation OF Lin
coins whole life; for his great public
career began. and was Throughout con-
ditIoned by. his inslstence, III the Dred
! Scott case, upon the fact that the
American people ware the masters and
court in the land. and were thereby the
| final interpreters Of the Constitution. II
the courts have the final sdy-so on all
legislative acts. and if no appeal can
are the Irresponsible masters of the
people. The only tenahle excuse for
sucn 7 position is the frank avo%al
that the people lack sufficient intelli-
themselves In other words, those who
take this position hold that the people
have enough intelligence to frame ana
adopt a constitution, but rot enough
Iconstituti0n which they nave themselves
made. Those people who take this posi-
ton mold that the people are compe-
| tent to choose officials to whom they
dele gate certain powers, but rot COM
potent TO hold these officials respon-
sible for the way they exercise these
powers. Now the power 10 interpret IS
the power to establish: and If the peo-
pie are not to be allowed finally to In
ierpret the Fundamental law, OURS is not
q popula" government. The true view
| -. 1NNH0 n liza a RI
the servants of the pc )ple. who have
been created bv the people pust as the
| people have created the Constitution;
and they hold only such power as the
people have for the time being delegated
10 them. II these two sets of public
servants disagree as 10 the amounts Of
power respectively delegated to them BY
the people under the Constitution, and
then as a matter OF course. It should
be tile right of the people themselves to
decide between them.
| 7 do not saw that 'hc people are infal-
| liblc. Put do say that our whole his
tmv SHOWS that the American people are
more often sound in their decisions
ssse rs taf G bodies ' to any whom fe
their convenience, they have delegated
| portions of their power. If this Is not
so. then there Is no justification for the
| existence of our Government, and If It
is so, then there is no justification for
| refusing to give the people the real
| and not merely the nominal, ultimate
| decision on questions of constitutional
law. Just as the people, and not the
| Supreme Court under Chief Justice
| fancy. were wise in their decisions Of
| the vital questions of their day, so
hold that now the American people as
| whole have shown themselves wiser
| than the courts in the way they have
| approach and dealt with such vital
questions of our day as those concern
ing the proper control of big corpora
tions and of securing their rights to in
| dustrial workers.
Calls Judges Misguided.
Here ! am not dealing with theories;
am dealing with actual facts. In New
York in Illinois, in Connecticut, lament
able injustice has been perpetuated,
often for many years, by decisions of
Continued on Seventh Page