Montana labor news., 1936-10-29

oSophy than he had at the time thai
he vas assisting Judge Galloway
and Judge Galen to write a record
branding the Supreme Court of
Montana as the most reactionary Su-
preme Court in the United States.
Certainly, it cannot be said that his
juristic philosophy as evidenced by
his decision in the Fireman's case
is any change, and certainly, it can
not be believed that a judge holding
the j%uristic philosophy of Judge
Angstman would have agreed with
Judge Matthews in such decision.
He consistently opposed him in that
character of decisions during the
time that he was on the bench.
1t will be remembered that two
years ago Judge Sands and Judge
Galloway were running for the Of
flee of Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court. Judge Sands was running as
a Democrat, Judge Galloway as a
Republican. Judge Sands had the
endorsement of every labor organ
ization in the State he had the en-
dorsement of all liberal and pro-
gressive organizations, he had the
endorsement of Senator Wheeler,
Jerry O'Connell, Senator Murray,
and every liberal candidate running
that year. Within approximately a
week of the election, a pamphlet
was circulated, bearing the sigma
ture of Judge Matthews, with the
signatures of some other members
of the Supreme Court, requesting
the voters not to vote. for Judge
Sands for Chief Justice of the Su-
preme Court. This was nothing but
an endorsement of Judge Galloway
and nothing but a request, signed
by Judge Matthews, to re-elect
Judge Galloway as Chief Justice of
the Supreme Court. Judge Gallo
way was opposed by the labor or
CARNATIONS. He was opposed by all
who p~rofessed any progressive or
liberal sentiments at all. If Judge
Matthews is the friend of labor that
his proponents profess him to be, if
he is the progressive and liberal
jurist that his proponents profess
him to be, why did he want as Chief
Justice of the Court a man who was
a known reactionary, opposed by all
progressives and liberals and labor
organizations, and a man who had
written a one hundred per cent rec
ord against labor, against progress
ism and liberalism to sit with him
on the bench and help him establish
the law of Montana? Why, if he was
progressive and liberal and had the
juristic philosophy of judges such
as Judge Holmes, Judge Brand
els and Judge Cardozo of the Sup
RENE Court of the United States, and
Judge Angstman and Judge Ford
and Judge Brantley and Judge Hollo-
way of the Supreme Court of Mon
tana, did he oppose Judge Sands who
had the same j~uristic philosophy, and
ask for the reelection of Judge Cal
loway?
Judge Angstman is the known
champion of human rights, his re-
cord On the Supreme Court as a judi
ge proves this. His record as at
torney for the Montana Railroad
Commission, appointed by Jerry
O'Connell, proves it. And anyone
who believes that human rights, if
not superior to property rights, are
at least equal to property rights, and
who desires to see such establish
ed as the law of the State of Mon
tana, will, without question. vote for
Judge Angstman for Associate Jus
tice. To those who believe that the
Supreme Court of Montana should
take its stand with the great pro-
gressive courts of the other states of
the nation, will vote for Judge Angs-
tman.
Very truly yours,
R. LEWIS BROWN,