Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1912-03-15
Y x x X X X x X X < K y Y x x

I I('
been accelerated by action of the
State and National Bar associations,
and we may look for decided progress
in the near future.
Discusses Recall of judges.
But these humdrum defects and
their tedious remedies are not Of the
spectacular character to call for poll
tical discussion or to attract effort
from politicians in the passage of
remedial legislation. The formidable
attack upon our judiciary now is that
the judges do not respond sufficiently
to popular opinion. 1t is said that
| courts are interposing their obstruc-
tive power to the enforcement of
legislation looking to the relief of the
| oppressed by declaring laws unconsti-
tutional and by so-called judicial legis-
| lation in interpreting into Statutes
| words not intended by the legislature.
do not intend to discuss these
charges, although if reduced to
specific cases 1t would be easy to
show many of them to be unfounded.
For the purposes of this discussion,
/ may admit that courts have erred
in this regard, have unduly broadened
constitutional restrictions in order to
invalidate useful statutes, or have
given such statutes a wrong construc-
ton. How is it proposed to remedy
| these wrongs? In one of two ways,
either by the judicial recall or by the
recall of judicial decisions. Let us
examine these remedies separately.
"In the remedy by judicial recall it
Is proposed to provide by law that
whenever judge has so discharged
his duties as to induce certain per
centage Of the electorate to deem it
wise to remove him, and that per-
centage sign petition asking his re-
call, an election shall take place in
which the incumbent shall stand
against other candidates; and If he
does not secure plurality of votes,
he is ipso facto removed. I have
pointed out that under our form OF
government and constitution many OF
the issues arising before our courts
are in effect issues between the state
and the individual, between the ma.
pority and the minority-cases in
which the popular interest might be
greatly excited to secure a favorable
judgment. By this system the ques
tion whether the judge is to be re
moved or not Is to be left to that ma
jority that may be greatly aroused
to secure from his judgment ia
vorable to them. Gould system be
devised, better adapted to deprive the
judiciary Of that independence with
out which the liberty and other rights
of the individual can not be main
tanned against the government an6
the majority?
"But it is said we may have cor
upt judges. How are we going tt
get rid of them? They can be i'm
peached under our present system
But that is said to be too cumber
some. Well, amend the procedure o.
impeachment. Create a tribunal fol
removal of judges for cause. Give
them an opportunity to be heard, ant
by an impartial tribunal; but do no
create system by which, in the hea
Of disappointment over a lost cause
the defeated litigants are to decid,
without further hearing or knowledg,
whether the Judge who decides
against them is to continue in Office
It would be hard to devise a NOR,
unjust and ineffective method of puri
flying the judiciary or one less likel.
to promote courage of honest con
viction.
Let us examine the other methot
proposed for the reform of the ju
dietary. That is recall of decisions
BY this method, when a suprem,
court has found a law, intended t,
secure public benefit, to be invalit
because it infringes some constitu
tional limitation, the decision is to b.
submitted to a vote OF the qualified
electors, and If majority of then
differ with the court and reverse tn,
decision, the law is to be regarde,
and enforced as valid and constitu
tional.
This is remargable suggestion
f,.1. ln