The Detroit times., 1912-02-21

harsh !. term To- use i'm describing thfs
law which. ir the event ot such an a.
cident. binds the whole pnfuen u
Gripping disaster on the shoulders
least able 10 bear 1.-THE shoulders ol
the crippled man himself. or OF tie
dead mans helpless wife and chlluIvh
No anarchist orator, raNing against tne
Constitution. ever framed an lnulCt-
ment OF A so severe as these worthy
and well-nleantng Judges must DC itlu
TO have framed III their reasoning os
-alcaEI4d-as- tEl4e--lIt+ -.t.ts+t--t-1,-
TACT their reasoning was uhsouna' anu
was as repugnant to every SOUND ue-
fender or the Constitution as 70 every
believer In justice and righteousness.
I'm effect their decision WAS that we
could not remedy these wrongs unless
we amended the Constitution lnot the
Constitution OF the state, bui the Con-
stitution OF the nation) by saving tnat
property could be taken without que
process or law. it seems incredlnIe
that any one should he willing To take
such position. IL is position That
has been condemned over and over
again by the wisest and most tar-see-
ing courts In It's essence II WAS re-
Nerscd by the decision OF state courts
i'm states like Washington aud Iowa,
and by the supreme court ef the ma
ton in case but a few weeks old.
l cali this decision To the attention
OF those who shake their heads at the
proposal 10 trust the people 10 declue
FOR themselves what their own gov
ernmental policy shall be i'm these mat
tiers. | know Of no popular vote ny
any state OF the Union more hasrant
in its defence OF right and Justice
more shortsighted I'm its inability 20
face the changed needs of our clNili-
Zation. than this decision by the hlSh-
est court of the state OF New York.
Many of the Judges OF that court 1
know personally. and for them | have
profound regard Even Tor as
fiagrant a decision as this / would not
vote for their recall, Ter nave no
doubt the decision was rendered IN
accordance with their ideas OF duty,
But most emphatically | do wish thar
the people should have the right 10
recall the decision itself, and authori-
tatively TO stamp with disapproNai
whas cannot but seem 10 the orul-
nary plain citizen monstrous misson-
struction OF the Constitution, mon
>strous perversion of the CONSTITUTION
INTO an instrument for the perpetual
ton OF social and Industrial wrong aud
for the oppression OF the weak ana
helplessN No ordinary amendment 10
the Constitution would meet this type
OF case; and intolerable delay anu IN
justice would\be caused by the cnort
10 get such alnendm ent-not to uirit-
tion the fact that\the very judges who
are at fault would proceed TO construe
the amendment. In >such case the
fault is not with the Constitution. the
fault isffn the judges construction or
the Constitution; and what>is required
Is power for the people to reverse this
false and wrong construction.
/ wish I could make you visualize 10
yourselves what these decisions against
which / so vehemently protest realIN
represent OF suffering and injustice.
wish 1 had the power TO bring before
You the man MANNED or dead, the
woman and children left TO struggle
against bitter poverty because the
bread winner has gone l am not
thinking OF the Technology OF the de-
cision, nor OF what seem to me the
hair-splitting and meticulous argu-
ments deliberately worked out to Jusu-
~ a great and a terrible miscarriage
OF justice. Moreover. ! am not think
ing only OF the sufferers in any given
case, but OF the. tens of thousands of
others who suffer because OF the way
this case is decided. In the New YORK
case the railway employe who was In
tured was a man named, i believe,
Ives. The court admits that by every
moral consideration he was entitled 10
recover as his due the money that tue
law intended 10 give him. Yet tie
court by its decision forces that man
to staeger through life MANNED, and
keeps the money that should be his In
the treasury of the company in whose
service. as an incident OF his regular
employment and In the endurance Of
ordinary risks he lost the ability 10
earn his own livelihood There are
thousands or Iveses in this country:
up every year; and while this is true,
while the courts deny essential and
elementary justice to these men and
give to them and the people in eN-
empty formula. II is idle to ask me
not TO criticise them. AS long as in
justice is kept thus intrenched by any
court. ] will protest as strongly as in
me lies against such action Remem-
be-. when / am asking the people them
selves in the last resort 10 interpret
the law which they themselves have
made, that after all | am only asking
that they step In and authoritatively
reconcile the conflicting decisions OF
the courts. In all these cases the
judges and courts have decided every
which way. and IL is foolish TO talk
OF the sanctity OF judge-made law
which half OF the judges strongly de-
EounCe. II there must be decision by
close ma joritS, then let the people
step in and let IL be their ma jority
that decides. According To one OF the
highest judges then and now on the
supreme court OF the Nation, we had
liked Tor a-hHRaFed- years-uaaef- Con-
stitution which permitted national
income tax. until suddenly by one vote
the supreme court reversed its
previous decisions for a century. and
said that for a century we had been
living under wrong Interpretation OF
the Constitution chat Is under 4
wrong Constitution, and therefore In
which we are now laboriously trying
10 amend so az TO get II back 10 be the
Constitution that for a hundred years
everybody including the supreme
court, thought il TO be. When I was
president we passed a National Work
mems Compensation Act. Under IL
railway man named Howard, I think,
was killed In Tennessee. and his widow
sued for damages. Congress had done
all IL could to provide the right but
the court stepped in and dccreed that
congress had failed. Three OF the
judges took the extreme position that
there was no way in which congress
could act to secure the helpless widow
and children against suffering, and that
the mans blood and the blJod OK all
ever cry aloud In vain for justice. This
seems strong statement, but IL Is far
less strong than the actual facts: and
/ have difficulty In making the state
ment with any degree OF moderation.
The nine justices of the supreme court
Rr-th4s-question- split-iatD-A Re-frakf--
ments. One man. Justice Moody, In his
opinion stated the case In its broadcast
way and demanded justice for Howard
on grounds that would have meant
that In all simllar-caSeS- theFeaftef-+tts--
tice and not injustice should be done
decided as l do not for one moment
believe the court would now decide 4
and not only pcrpetuated a lamentable
Injustice In the case OF the man
himself. but set standard for
all similar cases Here again
legal Journalism, but TO think OF
the great immutable principles OF jus
tice the great immutablc principles OF
right and wong, and to ponder what
IL means TO men dependent for their
livelihood and to the women and chill.
DIR al on mo NKEIt..