Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1912-02-27

into committee and thrashed out be-
fore that committee. Then it goes into
tn. house, is argued to and from. and
passed by the house. II then goes up
To the Governor. arguments Tor and
against IL are put before him. ana 1t
receives his signature. 1t then is tried
in the courts. and it cannot possibly
come to the final court before six or
eight months. 1t is then argued be-
fore that court. the court makes its de-
cision again. going over the case in
full. and stating the reasons for its
decision. BY that time over a year VIII
have elapsed
My proposal is that then. If the
court has decided that the legislature
plus the executive has exceeded the
power granted by the people to them
under the Constitution. the people
shall themselves have the right 10
say whether their representatives in
the legislature and the executive office
We're right. or whether their represent
atives on the court We're right.
Only Regular Election Vote.
"Provision should be made that no vote
could be had save at a regular election
not less than six months distant after the
appeal to the people is made. In that
case you see that the minimum time
would be two years of discussion by the
people. two years of discussion which
would include the first election. which
would include tie discussion before the
committee, which would include the dis
cussion before the house. which would
include the discussion before the gov
ernor. which would include the discussion
before the court. which would include the
decision of the court and which then
would include the six months discussion
before the people finally and definitely
acted.
There would have been two years dis
cussion. two years time for the fullest
elaboration and consideration. and that
being the case it is an obvious abSurdity
to say that [ am proposing to submit
such action to popular whim. to the
frenzy OF a moment. \ moment that
lasts two years is a long moment If in
two years the people are not able to
make up their minds about a question
then | am sorry for the commonwealth
of which they are citizens, and the posi-
ton | take in these matters is that of
Your own Massachusetts Justice on the
Supreme Court. Mr.. Justice Holmes when
he says in 4 recent decision in the Okla
hoTla bank case-and | quote his words
verhatiln:
1T may he said in general way
that the police power extends to all the
great public needs. 1t may he put forth
In aid of what is sanctioned by usage or
held by the prevailing morality or by a
strong and preponderant opinion to be
greatly and Immediately necessary to
the pubic welfare.
Justice Holmes View.
Justice Holmes has put the claim for
the exercise of the police power by the
state even more strongly than ever I have
put it in advocating its exercise. and that
opinion of Justice Holmes was given in
handing down the decision of the SUI
preme Court of the United States. and
that opinion is now part of the supreme
law of the land.
''All / advocate is giving the people of
the several states the right to put that
opinion into practical effect as part of the
law of the state. if the state court de-
clines to follow the example of the SUI
preme Court i'll that matter. declines to
adhere to the doctrine thus laid down by
Justice Holmes, a doctrine which is now
part of the law of the nation.
If the state courts. if the Supreme
Court of the nation in its past history.
and if the several state courts had lived
up to the doctrine which is laid down by
Justice Holmes, none of the decisions of
which ! have complained could have
been made, not one of them, and there
would haze been no need of advocating
the measure that | advocate.
But, taking my own state, the court
of appeals of the state of New York in
the workingman's compensation act, re-
ferred in their opinion to this very decl-
SlDH, ~ the very udSt L Hay Z ibotod,
and refused to follow it. The Supreme
Court held one view the court of appeals
of the state took the other view, and all
| ask is that the people themselves in
such a ease shall be given chance TO de-
clare whether they will stand by the SUI
preme Court of the nation when it stands
for human rights. by the chief court
of their own state when it stands against
human rights. If that is revolution,
make the most of it.