The evening times. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1906-1914, 1912-06-11
Feature of This Afternoons
Program at University
of North Dakota.

Of North Dakota.
The principal feature Of the CONF
mencement program at the state uni
versity today was the annual univer-
sity address which vas delivered by
Andrew A. Bruce, associate Justice OF
the North Dakota supreme court. JUS
tice Bruce vas dean Of the university
law school until last fall. when he
resigned to accept his appointment to
the supreme bench. The address was
of Woodwork hall. The hall was
crowded. Justice Bruce had for his
subject THE New Individualism."
''The story of the development OF
the English and of the American law
is the story Of a struggle between the
innate lover of the Northman for the
right to property and to opportunity,
portunity as he pleases. and h
broader idea which m from being
a member of an organized society
composed Of individuals with mutual
duties, rights and obligations. and
having a common loyalty to a COM
mon country and a common human
ity. It is. in short, the history of a
struggle between the idea of personal
liberty and the idea comprehended in
the legal maxim that the public well
fare is the highest law. This maxim
and its companion that 1t Is the duty
Of every citizen to so use his W as
not to injure hat which belongs to
another, are as firmly implanted in
the English and in the American law
as are the constitutional safeguards
which surround the right of property
49, "a sl,Arx r knoly Time
however. for their development and
recognition. They were opposed to
the individualism of the Feudal ages.
Their recognition was at first largely
brought about by the influence of the
Roman law and of the Christian
church, which thatfeudalism had for
a. time submerged. 1t was later
checked, strange to say by the indus
trial revolution and by the laissez
There a be little question that when
at the time of the Magma Charta the
feudal a~ristocracy of England de-
manded that they should not he dis
possessed. and that the king should
not come upon them except by the
law of the land. they were merely
anxious to secure to themselves a per-
feet license of conduct. and that there
was nothing in their demand which
Na9 ~ " - III NAsNS
time. indeed, at least seventy-tive per
cen of the population of England was
in the thrall of serfdom. and the
privileges demanded by the barons of
Runnymede were demanded by the
freemen of England. alone. 1t now.
however. may be said that although
the fourteenth and fifteenth amend
ments to the federal constitution n
their counterparts which are to be
found in the constitutions of the ev-
eral states, r grounded and founded
upon the provisions of the Magma
Charta. The words liberty n prop
erty used therein and in the clauses
which provide that no person shall be
deprived Of life, liberty and property
without due process of law, are COM
ing to be construed in a more altru-
istic and Christian manner, and III the
light of the maxims l have Just men
toned. 1t can now be safely said that
the courts and the public generally
for all the courts merely fife the
sober sense and second thought of the
public-have come to see and to hold
that a right to property and liberty
should never be guaranteed in mat
tiers and things which are injurious to
the public health. the public welfare
or The public morality, or even to the
convenience Of the public as a. whole.
The American constitution. indeed,
and the constitutions of the several
states did not grant any new liberty
or new rights. They only guaranteed
a continuance of the liberties and
rights then existing and even at the
time of the adoption of these consti-
or less barbarous and u~naltruistic
period of the Revolution. there was
admitted to be no right to liberty in
those things which are deemed to be
SO injurious.
Individualism.
1T is only, therefore. in determin-
ing upon what is and what is not in
furious to the public as to what are
and what are not matters of public
concern and perhaps as to who are
and who are not, in particular cases,
members of the general public, that
we experience any difficulty when we
seek to pass upon the validity Of stat
utory enactments which encroach
upon the freedom of the individual or
the free exercise Of property rights,
or as a people generally to determine
the sphere of governmental control.
For though. as we have said, there is
a great and constant struggle going on
between the principles of individual
ism n Of collectivism, and although
every new restraint upon personal ac-
tivity will always be more or less Wig
orously resisted, the doctrine that the
welfare of the public is the highest
law is generally recognized and the
growth of the law in social righteous
ness must ome and can come alone
from a broader conception of wherein
that public welfare really consists.
Even the individualism of the Ben
than type insists upon individualism
as a principle which shall be empha-
sized under government and in So
clety, n not out of society. 1t is
advocated as a governmental idea
from the standpoint of patriotism as
we'll as from that of the individual.
He who believes in it is no less a be-
lever in organized society than Is the
collectivist. He advocates individual
ism because he believes that 1t will
promote industry. economy and self
respect, and in promoting these vir-
tues will add to the strength of tho
state itself.
THE American law Of today and the
social system which 1t represents. in
fact the social systems of all civilized
countries. may hen be said to be
compromises between the two oppo-
sites OF i~ndfvfdualism and collectiv-
ism. There are several kinds of in
dividualisrn. however. There is the
individualism Of the NONRESIDENT an
archist; there is the individualism of
n 1/ mn