The Alaska socialist., 1913-12-20

ARGUMENT AGAINST THE RE- CALL or JUDGES BY MIR. JAMES II. WILKINSON, OF THE CHICAGO BAR.
 In the long and earnest debate in that convention there were matters as to which there was sharp difference of opinion, but there was one matter around which there was absolute unanimity, one idea which was regarded as absolutely vital and fundamental in any scheme of gov ernment which might be devised. That was that there should be one branch of the government 10 which the citizen could go and seek protection for Il s fundamental rights against even the state CT the nation itself It was admitted by all that for this branch of the govern ment to be efficient 1t was essential that the courts of justice De completely inde- pendent There must be branch Of government where controversies can | C settled free from the impulses and ris- understandings of the moment---a place where justice under law shall be admin istered and not the momentary wish of a temporary II ority Q tn e people registered. In one of his articles in the Federalist, Hamilton, speaking on this subject, says:
 ''The complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in limited constitution By limited con stitution, I understand one which con- tains certain specified exceptions to the legislative authority; such, for instance, as that it shall pass TO bills of attainder on ez1- post facto laws and the like | Limitations of this kind can be preserved in practice iii 10 other way than through the medium Of courts Of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts con- trary to the manifest tenor of the Con- stitution void Without this all the res ervation of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing.
 This independence of the judges is equally requisite to guard the constit- ution and the rights of individuals from the effects of those ill humors which the arts of designing men or the influence of \ particular conjunctures sometimes dis i seminate among the people themselves and which, though they speedily give place to better information and more de- liberate reflection, have tendency in the meantime to occasion dangerous in ovations in the government and serious expressions of the minor party in the community
 It is for this reason that the application of the principals Of the recall to judges ' presents Il entirely different question from that presented by its application to legislative and executive officers. The question of law making, the extent to which the people shall participate direct ly ill 1t, the manner in which legislators shall be selected, have always bee Il questions upon which there have been division of opinion as to the correc policy. How to give expression to the popular will and at the same time to make sure that the will which is express ed is the sound, honest judgment of the people, has always been a question of political expediency. And so with exec utive officers. What they q Q is, so to speak, in the eyes of the people The
 matters with which they deal have been the subject of political discussion.
 There has always been diversity of opin- ion as to the manner in which they should De chosen, the tenure upon which they should hold, and tile scope -of the authority which they should he