Arizona republican., 1912-03-17

I existed at the time of its adoption. but the minority that may exist at any time. For we all know that the ma jority of today may be the minor |ity of tomorrow. And it is to the everlasting credit of the American people that they have been willing to accept that constitution and respect 1 the restraints which it imposes. That l is the basis of our free government. ! But. il is argued, the courts have arrogatcd to themselves the authority of saying what laws are, and what ! laws are not, constitutional And in | this matter it is said they have over { stepped the limits of their rights ] This charge is as silly as it is un- ! true. The constitution, solemnly adopted and ratified by the people of this country. confers upon the federal ! judiciary jurisdiction lin all cases in law and equity arising under this constitution" It is the sworn duty of the judges of our courts To interpret 1 the law-statutory law. the common law. and constitutional law. Wher ever there is conflict, the judge must decide what is the law. If there IS conflict between a statute and the constitution. the judge must uphold | the constitution and declare the stat ute void Why? Because the consti- tuition is the supreme law of the land" That is the solemn declara- ton of the constitution itself
 Now. with these facts in mind, ask yourself What is meant by the popular recall of judicial decisions ?" It means where there is a conflict between the constitution and a stat ute, a popular majority has the right tu declare the statute, rather than the constitution. the supreme law of the land" It's case of every man his own constitutional lawyer" And q case is easily supposable where a single individual may cast the de ciding vote And this vote may be cast by man who has never even read the constitution.
 Suppose a case. Suppose the Methodist church. or any other church. obtained majority in con gross. And suppose congress there upon passed an act declaring that only members of that church were eligible to the presidency. The court would. of course, immediately declare that law unconstitutional, because the constitution says no religious test shall ever be required as a qualifica- ton to any office" But according to the insurgent program the question could then be submitted to popular vote: and if that particular church happened to have majority, the law could be held valid.
 Of course il will be argued that such case is 'fanciful and absurd, which is true. Yet. it is possible. And there are other insidious dangers that are neither fanciful nor absurd. The point is that the adoption of such q program means the inevitable destruction of our constitutional gov crnment. And that is precisely the program to which insurgency. which is nothing but modified form of socialism. stands committed
 It is up 10 the republican party to save the country from this revolu- tionary program. The democratic party will not and cannot do it. And here is the reason. It takes d two thirds vote in the democratic con vention to nominate candidate. William J Bryan, one of the high will control more than One-third of those delegates and will prevent the nomination of any man with the cour- age to fight that dangerous propa- ganda The nominee of the demo- cratic convention will have to sub scribe to that doctrine-at least he will not dare openly oppose it.
 It is. therefore. essential that the republican party steer clear of the dangerous rock of socialistic dcmoc- racy. It is necessary not only Tor the welfare of the party itself, but for the welfare of the whole coun- try The republican party has here chance to make history. It has the chance to do the greatest work it has ever done since the days of Lin coin. If it will stand out in front of the constitution and declare its al- Iegiance to that instrument in every paragraph and line and syllable 1t will place itself in a position that will be well nigh invulnerable.
 The fact remains that George Wash