The Grangeville globe. [volume] (Grangeville, Idaho) 1907-1922, 1912-03-21

oP'hioh. AC Outiooh W iSiiNo "
see their independence of the
the shifting currents of public
opinion carefully guarded.
Legislative and executive Off
GERS should be directly RESPONSE
BILE to the people. They are chos.
en- to carry out the will of the
people. If they fail to carry out
the will of the people, they fail
to fulfill the function for which
they are chosen. An official
chosen to carry out the will of
the people should either carry
out that will or be easily remova-
bic, that some one more amena-
bic to that will may be substitute
ed ILL his place. This is true even
If that will in any particular case
seems to him to be injurious, to
threaten the public welfare, or
even to involve individual injus-
tice. In such a case either he
should carry out that will or re
sign. This is the princi pie of
the British constitution, and it is
essentially just.
For this reason all Legislative
officers should be elected for
short terms. All elected execu-
tive officers should either be elect
ed for short terms or be sub
ject to recall by the popular vote
All administrative officers APP
pointed should, for the same rea-
son, be subject to removal by the
appointing officer if they fail to
carry out the directions of their
superior, and he in turn should b,
subject to be removed by the peo
pie, either by recall of by a new
election at the end Of short
term, if he fails to carry out the
will of his superior-the people
who have chosen him. Civil SER
vice rules should put limitation
on the power of appointment, but
rarely any other limitation ON the
power of removal than the right
of the official to a hearing. Per-
manence of tenure and indepen-
dence of superior authority in
every legislative or executive or
administrative officer is undesira
bic in democracy and might
easily become perilous.
But judicial officers are chos-
en-, not to carry out the will of
the people, but to determine what
is just between man and man, or
between the individual and the
community.
The chief business of the courts
is to decide between individual
suitors. They are necessary be-
cause the community has not
time to hear the issues joined be-
tween individual suitors and de
eide between them; and because
the community has not the ca
pacity, even if it had the time,
to hear witnesses, sift evidence,
and pay continuous and undis-
tracted attention to the argu-
ments of the contending parties
or their representatives. Because
they have neither the time nor
the ability to fulfill this function,
it is delegated to courts of JUS
tice. To allow an appeal from
the courts of justice to the peo-
pie, an appeal which at least in
theory may be taken at any time
and in any case, is to assume that
the people have what they have
not-time and ability to adjudi-
cate. The recall of the judges is
simply form, and a rather clum
sy form, of providing an appeal
from the decision of the court to
the opinion of the public. 1t is
perfectly clear that such an ap-
peal should not be provided for
in the ease of ordinary trials be-
tween individual suitors.
1t is even more clear that il
ought not to be provided for in
case in which the individual is
one party to the suit and the pub
lie is the other party. To make
the judge dependent upon the pub
lie in a case in which the public
is a party is to make the judge de.
pendent upon the will of one OF
the suitors on whose claim he is
to pass Judgment. The history
of England has proved that q
lawyer appointed by the king, anc
dependent on the king for the
tenure of his office, tends to re
gard the king as his client and
ta o. ], &c. EE;oo II, Al. N,