The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1912-03-07
THE RULEO The PEOPLE
Continued From PAGE one.

AAS SLOVS against e~uLTGnc1Gd Wr0nE
against privilege in the most hatefu.
FORM Of his day. We. in our day
strive against hateful forms OF in,
trenched wrong and privilege. W.
are not striving in bitterness OF spirit
Or with anger and hatred; as far as in
as lies, we seek t emulate Abraham
Lincoln's charity and kindness in
dealing with those who. as we believe
think enormously; but we also
endeavor TO emulate the u~nflinchine
resolution, the answering purpose
with which he fought for the great
cause of righteousness.
Abraham Lincoln believed in the lib
erty and the power of the people
achieved in lawabiding and orderly
fashion. He Believed in that liberty OF
the people which has law and order as
its twin handmaidens. He respected
the judges. But he regarded them as
the servants and not the masters OF
the people; and he believed that the
people had the right to decide for
themselves the great Fundamentals
questions of public policy, upon the
proper solution of which it depends
whether there shall or shall not be
r social Justice in the land.
Therefore we hold that. as regards
these questions of public policy, courts,
Ike executives and legislatures, must
bow to the sober and well-thought-
out Judgment of the people.
Let me repeat once more what / have
so often said-that / am not speak
ing Of ordinary cases Of justice be-
tween man and man, such as must be
L nANinHdE nv iIrdOaC hA~~l ~ A-.-k;a, :.
they are decided by Judges in all 9TH
er LANDS | shall speak of these cases
IN some subsequent articles, in which
shall ask theA people soberly to con-
slider such facts as these set forth by
z. P. Connolly in his recent article in
Everybody's Magazine. In this article
l speak purely of that kind of decision
which only American courts are en-
titled to make-the kind of decision
which no judge in our neighbor Can
ada, in Australia, in England, in Ger
many or in France has the right to
make, or would for n moment be
permitted to make. Nor, at the mo-
ment am / treating of the action of the
national courts, because the federal
form Of our government makes it more
difficult to propose a working remedy
in he case of the nation tina in the
case of the several states. I am speak
ing Of the action of the court of a
state when 1t declares that a law
passed in h collective interest of the
whole community is unconstitutional;
and / have especially in view the laws
affecting human rights from a most
vital standpoint-the laws affecting
the terms and conditions of life and
employment among the wageworkers.
l am not primarily concerned with
methods; my aim is to secure the right
OF the people to decide for themselves,
according to the principles of common
sense and justice, what the public poll
icy shall be in these matters. 1 am
concerned with the end, not the
means. If in any state the constitu-
ton so clearly defined the power Of the
legislature to act for the general well
fare as to prohibit the courts from null
lifying any law that is consonant
with moralitB and public policy as
Understood by a majority of the peo-
pie; AND If in actual practice the
courts respected such constitutional
prohibition, then there would be fun
recognition Of the absolute right of the
people to decide the policy Of their
representatives, legislative and iudic-
ial, in these matters-and this is all
for which l contend.
But in actual practice 1 know no
state where such conditions prevail:
they certainly do not prevail in the
state OF New York. Therefore I hold
that provisions should be made In the
constitutions OF the several states
which, in the event of a clash between.
the legislature and the courts as to the
constitutionality of such legislation as
/ have spoken of, should permit the
people themselves to decide what the
true Interpretation of the constitution
is. / am not concerned with terminol-
ogy. Whether this is called a referen-
dunn to the people or whether it is
called a shorter and simpler way of
amending the constitution. to my mind
matters nothing. The essential thing
is to get the power for the people.
1t is not merely nntruthful but silly
to say that such a process would leave
us "at the mercy of the mob.' Such a.
process as / advocate would take at
the very least two years time. If in
two years the people cannot come to a
sober and deliberate judgment then
it is impossible that they should ever
so come. If they have not the charac-
ter and the intelligence to enable them,
after two years deliberation, after see
ing the whole matter threshed out by
the legislature and before the execu-
tive and by the court, and finally by
public speakers in an election, to
themselves decide what they meant
when they framed the constitution,
then it is idle to talk of their being 1T
to frame q constitution.
The wisest judges have always fully
recognized the right of the people to
rule, this right of the people to be
their W masters and ultimately to
decide their own policy. As former
Chief Justice Campbell OF Michigan
said: THE greatest knowledge that
we have in this world is the common
knowledge of the common people" +
do not propose to give the people any
new power. I propose to restore to
them the power out Of which they
have been defrauded, the power which
it is their right and their duty to ex-
ercise. I propose to provide a better
and more effective method for the ex-
ercise OF the power reserved and in
herent in the people to make or un-
make their constitution or construe
the constitution In accordance with
their well-considered needs. I preach
no new doctrine. The proposal that I
make for the several states was ii ac-
tuaI practice acted upon by the people
OF this whole nation but a very short
time after the constitution was adopt
ed. The United States district Judge
for the Eastern district OF Arkansas,