Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-02-14
After a Welter ofNords.

Now that the shouting and the
nomination OF Charles Evans Hughes
to be Chief Justice, has died, the
record stands two to one in the Senate
for the confirmation of that able
American, whose selection was hailed
by the country with the warmest
approval. While the debate was in
progress-a brief debate in senatorial
proportions, though too long for public
patience-the wonder grew that "one
small head" could hold 50 many
ubiquitous views and concepts OF the
economics of American life. Speech by
speech, day by day, the accusation
mounted. This man, often honored by
the people, and only by political fiuke
and by the narrowest of margins denied
the presidency. was held forth before
the country IN open executive session
as an enemy of the people. And the
Supreme Court itself, long considered in
the common judgment of Americans as
the final safeguard of their liberties,
was portrayed as a moloch Of predatory
selfishness.
There were hours during the course
of this discussion when it actually
seemed as though the Senate might in
bilious mood reject the nomination.
There was a progressive tendency of
opposition as far as the record of
speeches went. Analysis of these utter
ances, however, now shows that they
were jointly provocative. The debate
became melee, battle royal. Every
body with a grievance took hand. All
the iniquities of American history were
dragged forth, all the grievances and
the grouches of disappointed sections
and fractions of the people were voiced
in protest, and in the end the Senate
voted two to one to confirm the nomina-
ton Of the most highly qualified Amer
lean for that eminent, commanding
position.
An attempt has been made already to
construe this hubble-bubble in the Sem
ate over the nomination of Mr.. Hughes
as a portent of grave unrest, a sinister
sign of trouble to come-a hurricane
warming" it has been called within
twelve hours after the confirmation. But
the public reaction to the VOC is one Of
relief, and the reaction to the opposition
to Mr.. Hughes and criticism of the
court as an institution is one of strong
disapproval.
The Supreme Court has passed
through many storms of public criticism
In the hundred and fifty years and more
Of its existence. 1t has been denounced for
its decisions, especially those of the five
to-four category, by those whose inter-
ests have been injured or whose theories
have been disapproved. The minorities
of the court have been again and again
held up to the public view by the courts
critics as the only true and righteous
opponents of the law and interpreters of
the Constitution. BY strange perver-
sity of Judgment the majorities of the
court have been more often denounced
than applauded by the more vocal and
perhaps more volatile representatives of
the people, themselves a minority.
With the vote in the Senate last eve
ming, the episode is ended. Fifty years
from now, or less perhaps. it will be
forgotten incident, and the court will
stand rs high in the confidence of the
people as it stands today and it will have
had the benefit of the presence at its
head, for. it is hoped. a considerable
span of years, of man who at the time
Of his selection stood foremost in quail
fications among his fellow Americans
for that high responsibility.