Arizona republican., 1912-07-18
Supreme Court Decision Against November Elec- tion Finds Favor in No Quarter of the State in Either Party
CAUSTIC CRITICISM
 BY A NEWSPAPER
Talk About Recall Which Was Considered Radical Two Years Ago Is Now Regarded as a Proper Weapon


 For two years it has been per- sistently dinned into the ears of the people of Arizona that courts are 8 very human institution and not de- serving of any particular respect. The insurgent press, in particular, has insisted that the ancient view of judicial tribunals, in which the people of this country have been nurtured, is all wrong and subversive of the Arizona idea of government. It has been insisted with a great deal of heat that the people of this coun- try have made a fetich of the courts: and that the action of these tribunals and the motives and prerogatives of the judges are subject to the same criticism as any other official or de- partment of the government. In word, the notion of a peculiar respect for the judiciary has been almost laughed out of existence
 All this leads up to the view Of the condition that prevails just now with reference to the decision handed down by the Arizona supreme court in the Davis Osborn election case. It is apparent, in noting the comment on this decision, that the teaching of the insurgents has borne fruit. This state of mind is reflected in the opin- ions of that decision, which has ap- peared in some of the newspapers Y and it is much more in evidence in the current discussion which one hears everywhere Just as an illus af l,fc hn mentioned that one newspaper brands the decision as infamous" and de- clares that the course pursued by the supreme court in this matter is un- paralleled in the history of any state in the union. After quoting several sections of the constitution, this paper says:
 Even a wayfaring man, though a fool, could read and understand the language above quoted. Any decision that prevents an election is a sub terfuge of the flimsiest kind, and every man in Arizona, except pos sibly the members of the supreme court and the legislature, will admit it without argument. God deliver us from the snare of the fouler and the pestilence in the form of election laws of this character and supreme court that can thus misin- terpret them.
 And incidentally the fact should not be overlooked that the supreme court rendering this peculiar de- cision increased their own term of off, flee for two additional years.
 That's going some, is it not?"
 
 of rather wide circulation. The ob- ject of making the quotation is to show the manner in which the decision has been received. In other quarters more of the blame is attributed to those members of the legislature who fought the idea of an election this fall.
 Here in Phoenix it must be said there is a vast amount of resentment. Also it must said that resentment is quite natural. Leaving out of con- the question whether the supreme court is or is not technically right. the fact. remains, and it is fre- quently referred to. that the universal assumption was that the first set of officers should serve only for the short term.
 It is rather strange, however that there are some of the office holding class who now say that that ques- tion was never raised. But glance at the files of any newspaper will show the contrary. Likewise. there are plenty of officeholders who will say candidly they were candidates for the short term and never had any idea that in the event of their elec- tion they were to serve longer than until next January. This fact was stated in open court by Judge Phil lips when the Davis-Osborn case came up before him. The judge said not only had he so understood the law. but had stated it openly in his campaign. The truth is that candi- dates generally made the same state ment And it is also true that the people have not forgotten those promises and statements.
 When the first whispers began go- ing around that there might be some doubt about this matter, The Repub- lican interviewed Judge A. c. Baker on the subject. The judge is perhaps one of the best read and most pro- found lawyers in Maricopa county. He is a former chief justice of the supreme court. and was also a mem Der of the constitutional convention. And in the interview which Judge in language as plain as it was possi- ble for him to use that the plain understanding in the constitutional