Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1923-11-19
ATTACK ON SUPREME COURT

If Senator Borah were the Supreme
Court his decision would be a one
man decision of the court; if he were
one Of the nine justices of that court
and four others voted with him it
would not be one-man decision but
that Of five men, as against four
others. We do not know that Borah
has called it one-man decision but
one of New York's representatives.
who is to introduce the Borah bill in
the House, has, saying the American
people ARE tired of one judge being
able, when the court is divided, to
declare unconstitutional acts of Con-
gress that are in keeping with
changed conditions"
Such remark obviously is intend
ed to deceive, not to enlighten. To
call majority vote a one-man vote
! is an insult to intelligence. 1t has no
element of fairness. This member of
the House would think it all right
for Congress to pass law by a ma
jority of one, or defeat it by a like
majority. He would not call that a
one-man vote, but when appealed to
the court he would not permit that
body to pass on it by a majority of
one. He is inconsistent, and, juds-
ing by his statements, somewhat I'M
enlightened.
The Boston Transcript has some
thing worth reading about the alb
surdity of the position of this repre-
sentative. Mr.. LaGuardia:
1.-THE attack upon the court is I'M
reasonable and contrary to American
principles, because the very feature
of procedure which is attacked is
COMMON to all other departments of
the government. In the Senate, of
which Mr.. Borah is member, in
case of tie the presiding officer
casts the deciding vote. Many I'M
portant laws have thus been enacted.
Were they "one-man laWs?" Were
they enacted by the vote of a single
man? The same is true of the House
of Representatives, of which Mr. La
Guardia is member. That body
frequently passed important legisla-
ton by bare majority of one. or by
the deciding vote of the Speaker.
Was that "one-man legislation?" In
| 1861 Rutherford 3. Hayes was
| elected President of the United
States by a bare majority of one in
the electoral college. Was he a lone
man PRESIDENT" Was he elected
President by the vote of a single
man? If so, we should greatly like
to know what one mans vote elected
him or could have elected him with
out the votes of the other 1874 Re-
publican, electors.
"The same principle goes further
1t is fundamental. If the polling in
Mr.. LaGuardia's district had been SC
close as to- elect him to Congress by
a bare majority of one, would he
have declined to accept the office, on
the ground that he, did not want tc
! be a "one-man representative" elect
ed by the vote of a single man? He
would not. He would have fought
in the courts, and in the House fol-
recognition of the fact that election
by a majority of one was Just as
legal, just as valid, as election by a
majority of thousand"
1t doesn't require anything above
elementary wisdom to make US dis
trustful of the scheme which it's pro.
moters put forward with misrepre.
sentation and denial of facts. 1t Is
not part of common sense to mus.
up matters unless there be some ex.
cuse for it. This is busy world, Il
is not easy to keep informed respect.
ing the machinery we already have
Unless that machinery shall be found
to be working mischief there surely
Is no sense in sending it to the scrar
heap because someone tells us HI
has something better in his head
Perhaps 1t is only wheels" he ha.