Newark leader. ([Newark, Ohio]) 1917-1946, 1920-06-04
Inconsistent Judges


The Supreme Court, in its decision
that stock dividends are not liable to
the income tax law, has given another
evidence that they are owned and con-
trolled by special privilege.
The members of the Supreme Court
or rather five of the nine members
of the court-through this decision,
took more than five hundred million
dollars out of the treasury OF the
United States and returned it to men
whose incomes are already so swollen
that some of them eXpend fifty
thousand dollars for a rug, and half
million dollars for a picture.
A few days ago, a minority of the
court-four of the nine members
devitalized the Sherman Antitrust
Law and laid down the astounding
proposition that the American people
could not shackle monopoly if in so
doing they "interfered with foreign
trade"
These decisions should cause every
liberty-loving American to frankly
ask himself this question:
"Should nine men, or five men, or
any other number of whatever
their official positions-be permitted
to nullify laws by the legislative rep
resentatives of 10 million people ?"
Before he answers the question he
should give consideration to these
facts:
In no other country in the world are
Judges permitted to declare uncon~
stitutional laws passed by national
legislatures. In other lands Judges
accept the law as it is given to them
by the legislature, and apply it to the
cases that come before them. In this
country the judges insist on rewriting
the law, multiplying such portions as
they see fit, and in some cases, with
an unbelievable etfrontery, actually
inserting language which the legis-
lature had refused to place in the law.
The constitution does not give the
supreme court, or any other court the
right to nullify laws enacted by Con-
gress.
The men who drafted the Constitu-
tion refused to give the courts such
powers, and in the early days of the
republic the courts remained within
the limits of the Constitution, but
under the leadership of John Marshall
the Supreme Court finally usurped
the authority to set aside Congess-
ional enactments on the ground that
they conflicted with the Constitution.
In the language of the street, the
court was permitted to "get away
with it," and while many attempts
have been made during the last hun
dred years to strip the court Of the
power thus seized, none has been sue
cessful. This has been due in large
part to the fact that Special Privilege
looked to the courts for protection,
and Special Privilege has always been
strong enough in this country to de-
feat every attempt to restrict judicial
power.
A quarter of a century ago Bryan
made the Supreme Courts decision in
the income tax an issue in a presi-
Dental campaign, and lost.
That decision was one of the scan
dals of American history.
Congress has enacted law taxing
incomes. It's constiutionality was
questioned by attorneys, representing
rich men. Arguments were made be-
fore the Supreme Court. Four of the
judges agreed that the law was con-
stiututional, four took the opposite
view, and the ninth was too i'll to
participate.
1t was agreed that the case should
be re-argued when the ninth man was
able to sit on the bench. This was
done and the ninth man announced