The evening times. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1906-1914, 1912-02-27
ROOSEVELT WORKERS BEGIN VIGOROUS WORK
IN HIS INTERESTS IN MANY STATES TODAY
Tore the committee. Then It goes into
he house. Is argued to and fro and
by the house. It then goes up


the house. Is argued to and fro and
pa assed by the house. It then goes up
to the governor. arguments for and
against 1t are put before him, and It
receives his signature. II then is tried
in the courts and it cannot possibly
come to the final court before six or
eight months: It is then argued be-
fore that court. the court makes its
decision again going over the case full
BY this time over year will have
elapsed.
my proposition is that then IL the
court has decided that the legislature
plus the executive has exceeded the
power granted BY the people to them
under the constitution that the peo.
pie shall themselves have the right to
say whether their representatives in
the legislature and the executive office
| were right or whether their represen.
tstives on the court were right.
Time to Think.
| Provision should be made that no
| vote could be had save at a regular
election not less than six months dis
tant after the appeal to the people is
made. In that case you see that the
minimum time would be two years of
discussion by the people, two years of
discussion which would include the
first election with which would In
clude the discussion before the COM
cussion before the house. which would
include the discussion before the gov
ernor. which would include the dis
cussion before the court, which would
include the decision of the court and
which then would include the six
months discussion before the people
finally and definitely acted.
ho1
| discussion, two years time for the
fullest deliheration and consider, ton
and that being the case 1t is an ohvi-
GUS absurdity to say that I am pro.
posing to submit such action to popu.
lar whim. to the frenzy Of moment
| "a moment that lasts two years is
a long moment.
If in two years people are not able
to make up their minds about ques-
ton; then am sorry for the common
wealth OF which they are citizens and
the position I take in these matters
is that of your own Massachusetts, JUS
ttce OF the supreme court, Justice
Holmes. when he says in a recent de-
cfsion in the Oklahoma bank case
and ! quote his words verbatim:
| 1T may be said In a general way
that the police power extends to all
the great public deeds. 1t may be
put forth in aid Of what is sanctioned
by usage or held by the prevailing
| morality or by strong aad prepond-
Grant opinion to be greatly and i'm.
mediately necessary to the public well
fare
Justice Holmes has put the claim
for the exercise Of the police power
by the state even more strongly than
ever I have put it in advocating it's
exercise and that opinion Of Justice
n yIy0 oH(n fya IN
the decision of the supreme court of
the United States land that opinion is
| land. -
"Ail I advocate is giving the peo-
pie OF the several states the right to
put that opinion into practical effect
as part Of the law Of the state. IL the
state court declines to follow the ex-
ample Of the supreme court in that
trine thus laid down by Justice
Polmes. doctrine which is now part
OF the law Of the nation. If the state
Courts. II the supreme court of the
nation In its past history. and IL the
several state courts had lived up to
the doctrine which Is laid down by
Justice Holmes none of the decisions
OF which I have complained could
nave been made. and there would have
been no need of advocating the meas
ure that I advocate.
"Rut. taking my owl, state. the
court of appeals of the state of New
York In the workingman's compensa-
ton act. referred in their opinion to
this very decision to the very language
have quoted. and refused to follow
It, The supreme court held ole view.
the court of appeals of the state took
the other view and all ask is that
the people themselves in such a case
shall be given chance to declare
whether they will stand by the SUI
preme court of The nation when it
stands for human rights, or by the
chief court of their own state when
It stands against human rights. If
that 1s revolution make the most
Of 1t. -'@
Wherein is it Sacred.
Some people speak as If there were
some peculiar sanctfty in a judicial
opinion in such matter as this. Very
well; IN which opinion? Which ia
the sacred opinion? Tho decision OF
the supreme court that have quoted.
OF the decision Of the state court that
conflicts with it? They cannot both
ne sacred, and ! hold that the decision
that holds for human rights ia sacred
Again. to listen to the arguments
OF certain worthy individuals who de-
[Continued on Page 81