New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1913-10-09
A PLEA FOR JUSTICE WERNER


To the Editor Of The Tribune.
Sir: The nomination Of Justice Wer-
ner for Chief Judge OF the Court OF APP
meals by the Republican State Convention
was the wise and logical thing to do.
BY reason OF his long training and ex-
nerience on tho bench. his legal learning
and brilliant abilities, together with the
fact that he will be the senior member
OF the Court OF Appeals on the retire.
nent OF Chief Judge Cullen. mis- nomiha-
ton was the best nomination to be MADE
The further fact that the State Bar AS
ISOLATION had recommended Judge Wer-
ner for this high and exalted position is
another important consideration
The only criticism from any source OF
the nomination OF Judge Werner comes
from my old friend Colonel Theodore
Roosevelt. and 1t appears that this criu-
cism in the coloners speech and platform
did not take shape until after Judge "er-
ner declined the Endorsement or the FRO
pressive committee. Judge Werner Is not
the kind OF n man who could be eN-,
nected 10 stand on n Republican plat
form which condemns the recall OF JUDGES
ana JUDICIAL uftlolollo anu o. 49,
time stand on a platform which favors
both OF these propositions. Any man VINO
knows Judge Werner knows that ne could
never be Induced to assume such POSI-
ton.
But in regard 10 the Ives case | wish TO
call public attention in the columns OF
your valuable paper 70 a point or two.
First wish TO call attention 10 the
fact that the decision In the Ives case
was a unanimous decision or the Court OF
Appeals, although the opinion was writ
ten by Judge Werner.
Second want TO call attention to the
fact that the Court OF Appeals ola not
oppose the proposed legislation providing
for workmen's compensation. but In the
opinion written by Judge Werner ex-
pressed sympathy with the object or the
legislation, but the court declared that
before the Legislature could enact that
particular statute II would have TO amend
the constitution and that the appeal should
be made to the people, and not TO the
courts, to change the constitution. Upon
this point Judge Werner In his opinion
said:
1--WE have already admitted the strength
Of this appeal TO the recognized and wide
~ prevalent sentiment. but We think IL IS
an appeal which must be made to the
people and not TO the courts. The right
of property rests not upon phiiosophicai
or scientific speculations. nor upon the
commendable impulses OF benevolence or
charity
"Tho right has ns foundation in the
fundamental la,c. That can be changed
bv the people, but not by the Legislature.
"In a government like ours theories OF
public good or necessity are OFTEN so
plausible or sound as TO command popu-
lar approval but the courts are not per-
mitted 10 forget that the law Is the only
chart by which the ship Of state Is to be
guided"
This is the essence Of the Ives case.
The statute passed by the Legislature
was in conflict with the constitution. and
the Court OF Appeals was obliged to de-
clare the law unconstitutional because OF
that fact or every member would have
violated his oath OF office.
There is another point In connection
with this case to which wish to call pub
lie attention, and that is the fact that
ever since the decision was rendered In
the Ives case every state In the Union.
with a single exception. has moulded Its
workman's compensation act In harmony
with the decision In the Ives case. That
decision has become the sun that has
lighted the way to legislation on this SUBJ
ject ever since 1t was rendered.
All the Progressive states and all the
legislatures of the states. with a single
exception. which nave enacted workmen's