Every evening, Wilmington daily commercial., 1921-05-20
TnF CHIEF JUsTICESHIP.

IlfI tHttt tt ~ IL
The most important question before
the American people now Is not, who
viii b. appointed chief Justice OF the
United ststcs supreme Court to sue
ee.d M White. hut VIII the man
chosen - Harding bc a reactionary or
progressive ii political ,aought2
Tar oral years the supreme Court
n,s f...u idgd more or i,ss into two
dr,n,t srorp. those Who make their
aasIr- fram ne leealsae construc-
II, tte tor stituuon, and tLosc who
t,N. Fl. mtudinarian point q view
gy .ut,J tnr former hold to The
....tt letter II tho Inv. while the latter
m.r. r,ard for the huinan rights
m.u,yl If Sociological and economic
n.tt
uooarrv wilson is 4 staunch sup
r..#.e 3. ths nt5udin,rian view. vii
i.4,. Howard Tat il believer in the
la nsne construction q the Constitu-
ta tfI.or moment a quote here from
ST. u ST. TaftS articles which ap-
y,ared ii ,ho Yaia Review during the
Presidential campaIcn last october
Mr. Wilson i I'll favor of a lau-
tudinarian construction u the Con-
stHntion Of tho United States, to
Weaken the protection 4 should afr
property rights. lie has made three
4uranfmcnts to the Supreme Court
H. Is understood to he greatly dis
aUpaintcd in the attitude of the first
81 hose Ilustice McRcynoldsp upon
W.A questions The other TWO
-,ict I}rs,ndcis and Ciarkel rep
I'D + uew school ~ constitu-
iu.ll construction, which. II all
lowed to prevail. Will greatly inn
iair Uur fundamental law.
Tnat. n course. is Mr.. Taft's con-
e.ryau,o view. and may be taken at
IL lca value Rut j IS illuminating.
,oa nat lis name IS being mentioned
rreeuon win chief Justice whites
m ,ha point x view 81 the reac-
clements ia the country, it is
r.uru,nt that property rights be
ac.a before human rights. hut If
United states is 10 grow in its
Inception q human rights, and Il man
s 81 placed before materiel. then It
Is more important that a lawyer Of pro
-ress.,1 thought be chosen by Mr..
Harding
Recently dec sions hy the Supreme
Court show how this line Of cleavage
draws ts,lt when the rights Of man
ard IL, 4eh,s q matter clash. The
n.-u-fons dccisior in Aprn in the
Ner ar. and ihe district Of Columbia
rer ases v3s victory FOR human
r.ehs Il vas loss for property rights.
Juauc.s Holm,s Brandeis. and Clarke.
Via renrysent the lautudinar:an school.
us iolned ia thei- decision by jus
tlcea Day ana Pitney chief Justice
Whlte. and Justices Van Deyanter.
McKepno. and McReynoids gave a
strictly legalistlc Interpretation of the
law.
An example Of property right victory
was the decision made ia the child
labor act. AS passed by Congress, that
statute would have prohibited the trans
mission ia interstate commerce Of all
goods made in plants whore children
uu'i,r "a years % age were employed.
ar where children between IA and 1e
were worked longer thar eight hours
4 day. The legalistc group. hy FIVE
10 four vote. decided that the act ex-
cecded the powers II Congress. and
invaded the rights Of The states. guar
anteed ~ the Constitution. Justices
Braudeis, Holmes. Mchepna and Clarke
diss~nted.
While one or two OF the justices can
not be consistently called member Of
either grcup. yet the remainder are
sharply divided % social and economic
questions. Justices Holmes. Brandeis
and Clarke belong 10 the liberal school
which Mr.. Wilson favors. and Justices
1iel<snua. McRcynolds. and Van De
vuntcr are certainly numbered on the
other side. whose views Mr.. Tatt ap-
proves. justices Day and Piney may
normally b. listed with tn conserve
tives. though occasionally. as 81 the
rent cases. they decide their questions
from what might be 1ermed the human
angle
There q bare possibility-nothing
aoro--that DIR. Harding may choose
4 man Of progressive sociological views
a. succeed Chief Justice White. Bui
that chance = remote. IL Is more
probable that he win name some cn'