The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1912-03-09
Trapped in Burning
Building, Many Lives
We're Lost in Chicago

lN@-~.@-~-~s@@-~.@I@-@~ .~e-e-@.~@~~~~~~-~~<>~
than that whici comes to any other
people in the world"
Taft's Toledo Speech
Toledo, O., March s.-In his speech
here. last night President Taft said,
referring to the recall:
Il have examined this proposed
method of reversing judicial decisions
on constitutional questions with care.
/ do no. Hesitate to say it lays an AK
at the foot OF the tree of well ordered
freedom and subjects guarantees of
life, liberty and property without rem
edy to the fitful impulse of a tempo
rary majority OF the electorate
The judicial Recall.
OF the recall judicial decision, Taft
said in part:
''This is a remarkable suggestion,
and one which is so contrary to any
thing in government heretofore pro-
osed that it is hard to give to 1t SER
S consideration which it deserves
se Of it's advocates and condi-
tie nder which 1t is advanced.
~ 1at this recall or decisions viii
amount to If applied to constitutional
questions viii be suspension of the
constitution to enable temporary ma
jorities OF the electorate TO enforce a
popular but invalid act
THE main argument used to sus-
tain such popular review of judicial
decisions is that If people are COM
petent to establish the constitution
they are competent to interpret it and
that this recall of decisions is nothing
but the exercise Of the power Of in
depreciation This is clearly a fall
lacious argument. The approval of
general principles in the constitution
on the one hand and the interpreta-
tion OF statute and consideration of
Its probable operation in a particular
case and its possible infringement of
general principle. on the other hand,
are very different things.
"One is simple, the latter complex
and the latter when submitted to a
popular vote. as already pointed out,
is much more likely to be turned into
an issue of general approval or disap-
proval of an act on its merits for a
special purpose of its enactment than
upon its violation of the constitution
Moreover, a popular majority does
not adopt the constitution or any prin-
ciple in it. or amend it's terms, until
after it has been adopted by con-
stitutional convention or legislature,
and the final adoption is. and ought TO
be surrounded with such checks and
delays as to secure deliberation.
Can it be that the power OF the
temporary majority OF the electorate
by a single popular vote can do away
with rights secured to individuals
which have been inviolable for 700
years. since the days Of the Magma
Charta, approves itself to those who
love liberty and who hold dear it's
sacred guarantees2
Would we not In giving such pow
erful effect to nomentary impulse Of
the majority Of the electorate prepare
the way for possible exercise Of the
satest tyrany? Finally, / ask what
is the necessity for such crude reyo-
lutionary fitful and unstable way of
reversing judicial Constructions OF the
constitution? why, il the constitu-
ton is wrong. can it not be righted by
q constitutional amendment
The answer made to this is that
the same urges would construe the
amendment and defeat popular viii as
in the first instance. This assumes
dishonesty and gross violation OF their
oaths to duty on the part OF judges, a
b othesis utterly untenable.
Il agree we are making progress
and ought to make progress In shaping
governmental action to secure greater
equality Of opportunity, destroy undue
advantage OF special privilege and ac-
cumulated capital, and remove OBJ,
struction to pursuit Of human happl-
ness, and in working out these diff
cult problems we may possibly have
from time to time to limit or narrow
the breadth of constitutional guarar-
ties in respect to property by amend
ment.
but if we do it, let us do it de-
liberately. understanding what we are
doing and with full consideration and
q clear weighing what we are giving
up in private right for general well
fare. Let us do it under circun-
stances which shall make the opera
tion OF the change uniform and JUST,
and not depend on the feverish. un-
certain and unstable determination OF
successive votes on different laws by
temporary and changing maiorities.
Such proposal as this is utterly
without merit or utility and instead OF
being progressive, is reactionary in
stead Of being in the interest Of all
the people and OF stability Of popu.
lar government, Is sowing seeds OF
confusion aY13 fvrannv.1