Perth Amboy evening news., 1912-05-27

TO WORK needed relleI.
What ~subversive doctrine has b
ever advocated2
1t Is true that he has said that cases
may arise in some of the states IL
which the people would be justified in
recalling an incapable or recreant
Judge or other official, but he has ex'
pressly affirmed that he is not propos-
ing anything In connection with the
supreme court of the United States nor
with the federal constitution nor with
ordinary suits, civil or criminal, as be
tween individuals, and has asserted
again and again, and / use his own
words, II do not advocate the recall
of judges In all states and in all com
munihes." He says this shall be left
to the states, where already differing
provisions as TO the appointment and
removal of judges are in operation. He
has expressed his belief that the sys-
tenn long In vogue in Massachusetts Is
a sound system.
But he says this, and in this claim
be LIS right - that democracy has a
right to approach the sanctuary of the
courts when a special interest has cor
ruptly found sanctuary there.
Initiative and Referendum.
Mr.. Roosevelt has been misrepre-
scented as advocating the initiative and
referendum, while as a matter of fact
he has said that the adoption Of these
measures of checking legislative ac-
ton is a matter for the states in their
wisdom to determine, with due regard
to local conditions. The idea of plac-
ing restraint upon the power Of the
legislature is not novel. Throughout
tho United States It exists in some
form or measure, and such checks are
no more at variance with the repre-
sentative principle than the executive
power of veto or the control Of leg1s-
lative action by the courts or such
constitutional checks as are found In
New York, for instance, where every
financial easur involving a public
debt beyond a certain limit must be
submitted to a popular vote. 1t Is a
quite common practice In all the states
to enumerate a list Of subjects on
which the Legislature lie prohibited
from passing private and local bills.
At the present time more than me
fourth Of the states Of the Union have
adopted some form of initiative and
referendum as a check upon their leg
i~slatures, and, including the states in
which the question Is now under de-
bate and these Ideas in process Of
adoption, 1t will only be a few years
before at least one-half of the states
measures In their fundamental laws.
Only the other day a constitutional
convention In the state of Ohio, which
is by 10 a state given to Ill con
sidered experiments or impetuous In
novation, adopted the initiative and
referendum into it's new constitution
by a vote of more than four to one
The progress Of these ideas marks
not the destruction Of representative
government, but the determination of
the people to preserve representative
government. When a state legislature,
as in California, has been under the
domination Of corrupt corporate infiu-
ence for many years, needless of the
common interest, debased and immune
from popular indignation through
fraudulent manipulation of the election
machinery, 1t is not strange that a self
respecting commonwealth should In Its
evaporation turn to any and every
expedient known to men TO end so in
tolerable a condition and to effect re
forms which, with old and wornout
Institutions and habitudes of thought,
the people have proved themselves
powerless to bring about.
ReoalI Of Judicial Decisions.
No idea for which Mr.. Roosevelt
stands has received such shameless
misstatement and dishonest criticism
as his proposal for a recall of certain
judicial decisions. Mr.. Roosevelt pro
poses merely that in a certain class of
cases, involving the police power,
when state court has set aside as I'M
constitutional a law passed by the leg
islature for the general welfare, the
question Of the validity of the law,
which should depend upon the prevail
ing morality or upon the preponderant
opinion of the people, should be sub
mitted for final determination to a vote
Of the people, taken after due time for
consideration.
Mr.. Roosevelt points to an existing
line Of state decisions heretofore rem.
dered under the life, liberty and prop
srty clauses and says these decisions
ought 10 be recalled. He has no pref
erence, he says, for any method, SO
long as the mode adopted is adequate,
prompt and efficient to attain the md.
His complaint is against decisions, not
against courts or judges, He assails
principles, not institutions or individ.
uals, and as stated by Mr.. Scoheld, pre-.
lessor Of law In the Northwestern Uni.
versity law school and associate editor
Of tho Illinois Law Review.
His challenge Of these state deci.
hons has the support of the supreme
court Of the United States"
Roosevelt wants to restore to the leg
i~slat1ve power Of the several states that
measure Of freedom and of Legislative
discretion in the choice Of means to
promote the public welfare In the sew
eral states, that the supreme court Of
the United States says r~ightfully be
longs to the legislative power Of the
several states under the life, liberty
and property clauses. The law, as laid