Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1912-03-21

UaVB TuTeU and IegiEIaIBu una U6EIu6U as
If in some way the vested rights of privi-
lege had a first mortgage on the whole
United States. while the rights of the
people We're merely an unsecured debt:
political leaders always, or generally,
recognized their duty to the people as
anything more than a duty to disperse
away and distribute patronage? Have
our leaders always, or generally. worked
for the benefit OF human beings, to in
crease the prosperity OF all the people,
to give to each some opportunity of living
decently and bringing up his children
I have heard no argument advanced
against the proposition dhe recall of GER
tain oficers), save that 1t will make the
favor with the mob. That argument means
that you can fool all the people all the
time, and is an avowal of. disbelief In
Is not 1t Is less important than to stop
those public officers from currying favor
with the interests.
Fsvors Direct Primaries.
The direct primary will give the voters
a method ever ready to use, by which the
party leader shall be made to obey their
command. The direct primary, II accom-
panied by a stringent corrupt practices
act, will help break up the corrupt part
nership of corporations and politicians
in my program are wrong because. they
intrude into the sanctuary or the 1uotci-
airy. The first Is the recall OF judges, and
the second. the review by the people or
judicial decisi )ns on certain Constitutional
questions. ] have said. again and again
that I do not advocate the recall of judges
In all States and In all communities. But
Il say 1t soberly-democracy has a right
to approach the sanctuary of the courts
when a special interest has eorruptly
found sanctuary there, and this is ex-
actly what has happened. IN some of the
States where the recall of the judges is a
living issue.
who people to judge such a case than
some special tribunal-perhaps appointed
by the same power that chose the Judge
II that tribunal is not itself really re,
sponsible to the people and Is hampered
and clogged by the technicalities of i'm
parchment proceedings.
So that no man may mfSunderstand me
let me recapitulate:
"a / am not proposing anything in con
nection with the Supreme Court of the
United States or with the Federal Con-
stitutlon.
20 1 am not proposing anything having
any connection with ordinary suits. civil
or criminal, as between individuals.
() l am not speaking of the recall of
judges.
Taft Policties Criticised.
"a 1 am proposing merely that In a GER
tain class of cases involving the police
power, when a State court has set aside
Legislature for the general welfare. the
question of the validity Of the law-whieh
should depend. as Justice Holmes so we'll
phrases it, upon the prevailing morality
or preponderant opinion-be submitted for
final determination to a vote of the peo-
pie, taken after due time for considera-
ton. And l contend that the people,, In
the nature of things, must be better
judges of what is the preponderant opin-
ion than the courts, and that the courts
should not be allowed to reverse the po-
litical philosophy of the people.
My point is well illustrated by a recent
decision of the Supreme Court, holding
that the court would not take jurisdiction
of a case involving the constitutionality of
the initiative and referendum laws of Ore
gon. The ground of the decision was hat
nature but should be left for determine
ton to the other coordinate departments
of the government. Is 1t not equally plain
policy is for the public good is not of a
judicial nature, but should be settled by
the Legislature, or In the final instance
by the people themselves?
The President of the United States, Mr..
Taft. devoted most of his recent speech
to criticism of this proposition. He says
and, instead of being = in the interest
of all the people, and of the stability of
popular government, Is sowing the seeds
Of course means the tyranny of the major.
ity, that is, the tyranny of the American
people as a whole.) He also says that my
proposal (Which, as he rightly sees, is mere
~ a proposal to give the people a real
instead of only a nominal. chance to con-
strue and amend a State Constitution with
reasonable rapidlty) would make such
amendment and INTERPRETATION 7depend on
the feverlsh, uncertain and unstable de-
termination of successive votes ON diff
majoritles:' and that ut lays the axe ut
the foot of the tree of well-0rdered free
dom, and subjects the guarantees OF the
tperty, and property without remedy to the
ftful impulse OF a temporary majority of
an electorate
This criticism is really less a criticism of
my proposal than a criticism Of all popular
government. 1t is wholly unfounded. unless
1t is founded on the belief chat the people
are fundamentally untrustworthy.
The people must know better than the
court what their own morality and their
own opinion is. | ask that you, here, you
and the Others like YOU. you the people,
views of justice and public morality, and
not sit meekly by and have your Views an
nounced for you by well-meaning adj
herents of outworn philosophers, who ex-
vital needs of human life.
Mr.. Taft's position is the position that
government, although not always SO
openly held, by a large number of repu-
table and honorable men who. down at
bottom, distrnst popular government and,
reluctance, and hedge it around with
every species of restriction and check n
balance, so as to make the power OF the
people as limited and as ineffective as
possible.
Mr.. Taft fairly defines the issue when
he says that our government Is and
should be a government of all the peo-
pie by a representative part of the people.
This is an excellent and moderate de-
scription of an oligarehy. 1t defines our
government as q government of all Of the
people by a few of the people. Mr.. Taft,
In his able speech, has made what Is prob
ably the best possible presentation of the
case for those who feel in this manner.
Essentially this view is that the Con-
stitution is a straittacket to be used for
the control of ar unruly patient-the
people. Now, 7 hold that this view IL not
only false, but mischievous; that. our con
stitutions are instruments designed to
secure justice by securing the deliberate.
but effective expression OF the popular
will: that the checks and balances are
valuable as far, and only so far, as they
accomplish that elaboration. and that 1t
is a warped and unworthy and improper
construction of our form OF. government
to see In 1t only a means of thwartinR the
popular will and OF preventing Justice.
Mr.. Taft says that every class should
have a voice in the government. That
seems 90 me a very serious misconception
of the American political situation. The
real trouble with us Is that some classes
have had too much voice.
The same principle applies When MT.
Taft says that the judiciary ought not to
be representative OF the people In the
sense that the Legislature and the execu-
tive are. This is perfectly true of the
ordinary functions of a judge In suits be
tween man and man. 1t is not true OF the
Obtain New Life. Howeli's