Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1912-03-09

Daniel Webster's speeches on the
necessity OF maintaining checks ans
balances in constitution to secure
the guaranty Of individual rights and
well ordered liberty and then led up
to his discussion Of the judiciary.
ut is a complete misunderstanding
of our form of government" the Pres
ident said, .'or any kind of government
that eXalts Justice and righteousness.
10 assume that Judges are bound t.
follow the viii of a majority of an
electorate in respect OF the issue for
their decision.
The judiciary, he said, was not rep
resentative in the sense that The eE-
eeutive and the legislators were.
whether judges be appointed or elect
ed. because they must enforce the laW
as they found it,
In many cases before the judges
that temporary ma iority is real
party 10 the controversy TO he de
eided.", the President continued. II
may be seeking to deprive an indi-
vidual or minority OF a right So
cured by the fundamental law. IL
such a case if the judges were mer,
representatives or agents Of the ma
jerity to carry out it's will they would
lose their judicial character entirely
and the so -called administration OF
justice would be farce
At this point the President repeated
his former declarations that the judi
cial system was not as perfect as il
might be made and called attention
to his speech and messages to congress
urging reform in procedure. He
spoke of delays and the costs of litiga-
ton.
But these humdrum defects and
their tedious remedies" he declared
are not OF the spectacular character
to call for political 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
obstructive power to the enforcement
of legislation looking to the relief OF
the oppressed by declaring laws I'M
constitutional and by so-ealled judi
cial legislation in interpreting into
statutes words not intended by the
legislature"
Z. such charges if reduced to specific
instances. The President thought could
be shown to be unfounded for the most
part, bat Tor the purposes Of his dis
cussion he might admit that courts
had erred in that regard, had unduIY
kroadcned constitutional restrictions
to invahdate useful statutes or had
given 10 statutes a wrong eonstfHc-
ton.
Indeed / do not hesitate To say that
[ d net eoncUr in the reasoning Of
certain courts of LOST resort as t. tho
Institutional validity Of certain So
eial reform statutes and | am very
anxious that tho remedies proposed
in those statutes should lie given eff
fective operation"
The President then took UP The pro-
posed remedies, first the recall Of
judges and later the recall Of judi
cial decisions. Then the recall OF
Judges, he declared. there could not be
4 system better adapted Ia deprive the
judiciary Of that independence with
out which the liberty and other rights
Ct the individual cannot be maintained
against the government and the ma
jority"
r. the impeachment were too cum
hersome 4 proceeding to apply to cor
rupt judges, he proposed a tribunal
for the removal of judges for cause.
OF the recall of judicial decision
President Taft said in part:
This IS remarkable suggestion and
5pe which is so contrary 10 anything
in government heretofore proposed
that it is hard to give to it the serious
consideration which il deserves be
cause of its advocates and OF the con-
dttions under which it is advanced.
what this recall of decisions will
amount to if applied to constitutional
questions is that there viii be Il sus-
pension of the Constitution to enable
Il temporary majority of the electorate
20 enforce a popular but invalid act
President Taft pointed out that the
right of habeas corpus might be affect
&c. or that a rich corporation seeking
privileges in the development of
state-and he cited Alaska-might use
such a condition to advantage.
"A most serious objection to the re-
call of decisions is that it destroys all
probability of consistency in eonstitu-
tional Interpretation. The majority
which sustains one law Is not the ma
jority which comes to consider another
and The obligation of consistency OF
popular decision is one which would
sit most lightly on each recurring
electorate and the operation OF the
system would result in suspension of
application of constitutional guaran-
ties according to popular whim.
we would have then system Of
suspending the constitution to meet
special instances. But the main ar
gument used to sustain such a popular
review of judicial decisions is that II
the people are competent to establish
constitution they are competent To
interpret It and that this recall of de-
cisi0ns is nothing but the exercise of
the power Of Interpretation.
This is clearly fallaeious arGu-
ment Tie approval of general prin-
e!ples in constitution on on2 hand
and the Interpretation of q statute and
and consideration of its probable oper-
atior in 4 particular case and its pos
eibc infringement of a general prin-
Giplo on the other hand, are very dif-
ti,t,a1