Albuquerque morning journal., 1913-12-29
Glad That Journal
C0RlmeHdS Roosevelt

Flagstaff. Arlz.. Dec. 81, 1913.
Editor Albuquerque Morning journal;
Ii is pleasure TO note that the
journal has found something ln the
career uf Colonel Roosevelt Co com
mend j refer to the editorial ape
poarug in todays issue under the
caption "RooscFelts New Work, in
which it is pointed out that Roose-
velts explanations of the Monroe doc
trine to the South American c0un-
tries Is very likely TO prove his great
est achievement. To those familiar
with the Journals expressed hostility
% thiua Rolacyot.an even in some
spsrc.ts whore the actions and ut
lcraucos 81 The colonel are prob1hlf
mmlnrrable as in Che case of his d.
bcl suit against tho Michigan editor
rv whom ha had been meudaCluuslr
assalled during the last national cana
pa'gn, the friendly tone Of The artl-
le came as a distinct surprise Hay-
Ing impugned his motives and ques-
ioned his sincerity in nearly every
.hing else il is not definitely under
stood why this opportunity was AZ
lowed to go by The boards.
So long as "a newspaper fights fair.
as the journal seems inclined TO do
in most respects, It's opinions Of men
ma measures are of no concern To-
its readers even though they may mold
views directly opposite.
With Difference 20 the Journals
stand as regards the judiciary even
houEh there is suspicion IL is not
wholly unbiased. there are many peo-
pie iu the country who with the col-
ouol hold thai judges aro not handed
down from heaven and hence are not
above mistakes or criticism.
Many believe with him tAat laws
enacted by ecnggcsg affecting the
welfare of The people in general
should he supreme as i'm England.
and hence beyond court interference.
Just why IL would be dangerous for
the electorate Of this country TO have
the right to recall judicial decisions
ON constitutional questions. a prcr0ga-
tive that orr courts have in gll proha-
lnitv assumed contrary 60 the
intentions of the trainers of the com
stItutl0n and arrugafed unto them
selves over legislation. privilege not
permitted the courts OF Great Britain
atler which our judicial system is
modelled. is something that has never
been clearly demonstrated hy the
proponents Of cur present judicial sys-
tenn. DO our lives, our liberties and
our property rights depend wholly
upon our courts3 Take Chief Justice
1aneys decision IN the Dred Scott
ease upholdine the right of the slave
holder 90 take his slaves IN free ter
rltory ana there hold them in bond
age In defiance Of public opinion.
This decision Is said to have been TN
accordance with the organic law ~
the country yet it was one of the
cause Of the civil war resulting in
tremendous loss of life and property
and causing a number of amend
mcnts 10 be added to the dear Old
resilient constitUtlon-amendments de-
signed to make unconstitutional GER
tain property rights previously i'm oc-
cOriancc with that instrument And
then there are the two cases Of re-
cent date where an income tax and
the election Of United states senators
by popular ballot were made consti-
tutional II follows then that many
court decisions are radically wrong
and often contrary 20 the expressed
viii OF the people, from whom aN
governing bodies derive their just
powers. The supreme law Is that en-
shrined In the hearts Of the people
the power that gives and the power
thgt takes aWaE.
Very respectfully.
BERT HAsGETT.