The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1912-04-05
DECISION WAS AGAINST
RECALL OF THE JUDGES
Debate Between High School
Societies LAST Night.
SILVER CUP ALUABLE PRIZE
Talk Contest Won BY PhiIomethians;
Good Arguments Brought Out
During Grafton.
From Saturdays Daily.

IfiOhI Sdlutu dy lazy.
Resolved, that the constitution Of
Minnesota should be SO amended as
to provide for the recall of judges,
was the question which occupied
the attention Of Il large audience al
the high school assembly room las
night, when the two literary socie
ties of the high school debated fol
over one and Il half hours. The
Zetamathians upheld the affirmative
while the Philomathans stood fol
the negative After the debate was
over the judges, Professor NJ. w
Deputy, Professor W. w. Frost ant
County Surveyor w. II. Brooks, hand
ed in their decisions, two in favor OF
the negative, or the PhilOnathians
and one for the Zetamathians. This
gives the large silver loving cup tC
| the Phlomathians for the coming
year.
Preceding the debate the higl
school room was filed with class and
society yelling, and the boys ant
girls were allowed to put forth theil
best efforts and some of the audi
ence who had never heard the class
yells were given a glimpse of boil
| school and college life. Professor ]
M. Mcconnell presided in the alb
| sence of Professor j. A. Hancock
who was to have acted as chairman
but who was out of the city. Be
| ha tn Nv
nell spoke briefly in which he stated
that the silver cup was given il
1904 and 1905 by the Social Science
club for the best debating team. This
was the eighth annual contest. He
| believed in yelling and thought il
| was proper in a place like this.
Makeup of Two Teams.
The two debating teams were com
posed Of: Maurice Nelson, Edward
Wise and. James Balm for the Zeta
mathians; and Ray Hughes, Willis
| Randall and Arthur Weed for the
Philomathians.
Mr.. Nelson made the opening ar
gument Of the evening. His frs
statement was that good conditions
are essential to good government
and the value of good Judges can
not be overestimated. The debate
for the evening would concern it
self merely with the judicial branch
! The judiciary at present is unsatis
factory, for there are judges who
are tyrannical and who are bought
with wealth. These can do almost
as they please in the court-place
| case at the end of the calendar, OF
take a case out of the hands OF the
Jury or rule out the case entirely
He cited an example of some OF tht
great railroads who had practically
bought the judges, he said, who hat
become law makers instead of law
| interpreters. So far, in fact, have
some of the large corporations car
ried this, that they sometimes open
| ly boast that they purchase a de
cision. Any system which permits
of such abuses should have the re
| call.
Hughes for the Negative.
Ray Hughes was the first speaker
| for the negative. He said that the
| present conditions do not demand
lchange The recall had never beer
demanded by the people of Mime
| sofa, for the people as a whole have
| not shown much interest in the mat
| ter. The great part Of delay in the
| ho nf
but antiquated methods Of the law
| The recall would work out poorl!
when actually put in practice. ore
/ gon is trying it, but it is not ye
determined whether it will work ou
all right.
Mr.. Hughes cited the case of the
| attempt at recall in Mankato, which
he said had failed, and that stated
that the recall would never brins
about the desired results. If the
judiciary is made responsible to the
whims of the people, then they vii
not fulfill that for which they were
chosen. 1t would become too mucf
| like the ward politics. IL the pres
| GiII vi ID uioliiS1 ScN''
| thought to be unfair, the case may
| be appealed to the supreme court
Edward Wise then spoke for the
affirmative. The forefathers were
wise when they made the laws and
they made substantial laws but II
those days conditions were different
The judges have been made respon
sible to the people in two ways be
fore. First by impeachment, ano
second, by the recall. Only the oper
violation of the law has been made
the circumstance by which judge
was impeached. And in this there
are five questions where impeach
ment of the judges would not be
iustifiable but where the judge should
still be removed
When Judges Should Be Removed.
! First, temptation by brides; sec
ond, intemperance; third, tyranny
fourth, interests lost so as to become
law maker instead of law interpre