Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-05-09

Congress the power to regulate such
methods Of production.
The Supreme Court has in almost
the whole history Of the country been
the object OF stormy controversy within
its own membership, in Congress and
in public and private discussions among
the people. Following the Civil War,
Congress reduced the number of judges
from nine to seven in order to prevent
a decision which it did not wish to be
rendered. Later it increased the number
from seven to nine in order to bring
about q decision which was desired.
Efforts have been made in the heat of
passion to impeach members of the
higher court, largely on political
grounds. and it Is undoubtedly true that
political considerations have on many
occasions dictated appointments to this
great court, but / believe 1t can be
said that IN the main, in spite OF con-
troversy and political acrtmony grow
ing out of the decisions of the Supreme
Court. 1t has established itself in the
esteem Of the people as a sort Of
balance wheel in our scheme of govern
ment. If the Federal power Is to be
held supreme in any field where 1t may
properly be exercised, 1t Is difficult to
conceive any tribunal qualified to pre-
serve that supremacy unless it be the
Supreme Court. II it may be conceived,
as well it may, that Congress may
transcend its authority in the passage
Of an act and that the President may
do SO in his approval Of it, what other
tribunal exists to pass upon such Ques-
tons except the Supreme Court? If
either the Federal or State Government
should attempt unjustly to deprive
citizens of their rights, either of life,
liberty or property, what other tribunal
should be accorded the power to pre-
vent this injustice except the Supreme
Court? There Is no other tribunal nor
branch of our Government that could
do so.
Should Be Statesmen.
This, of course, presupposes that
members of the Supreme Court shall not
only be great legal technicians qualified
to pass upon the private rights of par
ties to law suits, but that they should
be statesmen as well, familiar with
great questions of statecraft and public
policy, able to visualize the effects of
their tremendous power upon the
destiny of the people for whom they
speak. This does not presuppose that
members Of the Supreme Court should
be Influenced by the passing within of
any popular caprice. Neither does it
orderly processes of progressive gov
eminent, or the changing relationships
existing among people and between
them and their Government. I recall
wildly an instance which occurred
during President Wilson's administra-
ton. The Kentucky delegation had
called upon him to present the name of
a distinguished Kentuckian to fill a
vacancy that then existed on the
Supreme Court. When we had each
finished our little word of recommends
ton, he turned to us with this inquiry:
Gentlemen, does your candidate be-
ieve that the law grows or does he take
the Iegalistic view that 1t Is f1niShed?"
1t has been one of the glorious
achievements of our modern democracy
that the Supreme Court of the United
States. having assumed the right to
exercise judicial review over legislation,
has been In the main sufficiently pro-
gressive to recognize that law and gov
eminent, like everything else that lives,
are matters Of growth and development.
Any political organization and any
form or branch Of government that
does not recognize the fundamental
necessity Of keeping the agencies of
government sufficiently flexible and
adaptable to solve the growing and
tional life, will find that popular sup
port declining which is so necessary to
infuse confidence and faith into the
agencies and functions of all govern
ment.
Constitutional Responsibility.
There is, therefore, nothing strange
to be found in the recent history of the
Senate in the consideration of appoint
mentS to the Supreme Court. The re-
sponsiblity of the Senate is a consti-
tutional responsibility. It Is a co-eoual
responsibility with that of the Execu-
tive in first initiating the appointment,
and while differences of opinion may
sometimes make 1t unpleasant and dis
agreeable, it Is no more possible for the
Senate to escape its responsibility in
this regard than 1t Is to escape its re-
sponsibility in the enactment of legisla-
ton. No patriotic man or woman would
wish that any form of legislative DOM
ination should be exercised over the
highest court Of the land. No one in
terested in the welfare of America
would wish to see the Supreme Court
become shifting political appendage
to any party or any regime: Neither
| would anyone wish that it should be-
come the reservoir of Anticipated and
| outworn philosophy, either as to the
rights Of man or as to the methods of
their preservation. The exercise of the
| great powers with which the Supreme
! Court Is clothed will continue to have
| profound effect upon the welfare and
rights of the American people, and the
] destiny of the Nation In the solution
of its complex problems will continue
to a great deQree in the keepinR of this