The Washington times., 1915-05-29
THE SELECTION OF JUDGES

been much discussion in this coun-
try concerning the comparative mer-
It's Of election and appointment of
judges. 1t began with attacks
aimed especially at the Federal judi
ciary; but in more recent time it has
dealt also with problems Of the
State judiciary in mahy States.
As net result, there has not
been, so far as now recalled, a single
change from the elective to the ap-
pointive, or from the appointive to
the elective. If any changes have
been made, they have been few
enough to be merely the exceptions
that prove the rule. Massachusetts
long-maintained system of appoint
ing judges has been repeatedly cited
as the proof in favor of that plan ;
for Massachusetts, has been fortu-
nate under it in having a remark
ably able and high-grade bench. On
the other hand the elective system
in New York has been attacked on
the ground that it lets the political
bosses control nominations and thus
too extensively dominate the bench.
There has been much insistence in
some quarters that Federal judges
ought to be elected rather than ap-
pointed, and for limited terms rather
than for life. Throughout those
States where least criticism of the
judiciary has been heard the cleo
tive system is the general rule; yet
in New York, Missouri, Illinois,
and some other States the elective
system has produced among the
worst results.
The public has been slow to un-
dertake judicial reorganizations; {;
each community has seemed con-
vinced that its own system best
suited its own purposes; and it is
probable that on the whole there is
justification for this feeling. Mas
sachusetts is rather the sort of
State in which an appointing, long
term judiciary would seem likely to
make its best showing; while the
Western States would be quite un-
likely generally to feel satisfied
with losing the popular prerogative
OF electing judges. The fact is that
in the Western States generally,
popular election does mean pretty
effective popular control. There are
few subjects on which the average
mid-Western State is more re-
sponsive than anything like a de-
termined criticism of the bench,
State supreme courts have been re-
organized time and again by process
of nomination and election, because
the people became convinced that
reorganization was needed.
If there is to be election of judges
1t would seem that the terms ought
not to be unduly long; for there are
obvious dangers in the elective sys.
tenn, which the elective system
should be left free to correct, and
which it has small chance to cor.
rect when judges are commissioned
for very long terms.
Justice Ingraham, of the New
York appellate court, who has
served on the woolsack well into
the fourth decade, has presented ar
impressive statement of the case fol
appointive judges, before the con
stitutional convention at Albany. HI
asked the convention to hear hin
behind closed doors and then made
what is described as an amazing
revelation about the relations of DO
litical bosses to judges whom they
have nominated. He told incident
after incident out of his long ex
perience to show just how judges
are made by the bosses, and how
afterward they use their judicia
powers to pay their obligations t.
their makers. Judge InRrahan