Evening star., 1937-03-30
Text Of Glass Address Assai|ing Court Plan

the proposal being discussed will not
court. 1t will do in this case par
ticularly what Thomas Jefferson pun
gently deplored when he declared "the
multiplication Of judges only enables
the weak to outvote the wise" The
fact is their proposed bill will cure
none of the alleged evils which offend
their ideas of judicial reform.
Why should We not proceed, as in
honor we are bound to do, by first con-
triving legislation for social and eco
nomic security, painstakingly drafted
by competent lawyers with a clear
conception Of the constitutional pro-
hibitions against invading the rights
of business and individuals by a Spe-
cies of confiScation and by utter in
difference for reserved powers of the
States? Why should we not quit leg
islating by pious preambles and con-
form our enactments to the require
mentS of the Constitution and thus
put upon notice the cabal OF amateur
experimenters that we will have no
more of their trash. Let us have no
more bills for "unfettered" delegation
of authority, SO obviously unconstitu-
tional as to have prompted the PreSi-
dent TO make an unhappy appeal for
disregarding all reasonable doubts. :"
Let us meet the issue confidently, but
with determination to promote the
general welfare of the Nation and not
merely to surrender control of the
Government to special groups.
If it then be found that we were
mistaken in the expressed belief that
the Constitution Is ample to our pur-
poses, let us do what we promised to
do and appeal to the people to amend
their supreme law. Let the impatient
proponents Of the pending scheme
turn TO the advice of George Wash
ington in his famous farewell address
in which he admOnished against dis
regarding reciprocal checks in the
exercise OF political power" saying
If, in the opinion of the people, the
distribution or modification of the
constitutional powers be in any par
ticular wrong, let it be corrected by
oA1 AL lilC way 4Al WlllCll
the Constitution designates. But let
there be no change by usurpation; for
though this in one instance may be
the instrument of good, it Is the
customary weapon by which free
governments are destroyed"
Let those who would conf1de to
the President complete control over
the Supreme Court by sanction of an
obedient Congress reread the farewell
address Of Andrew jackson, in which
he cautioned the country against the
jeopardy to their liberties of a con-
solidated Government and the evil
| consequences Of permitting tempo
rary circumstances, or the hope of
better promoting the public welfare,
to influence, in any degree our deci-
sions upon the extent of the authority
OF the general Government. Let us
abide by the Constitution as 1t Is
| written" he urged, cor amend it in
the constitutional mode if it be found
defective"
Jefferson's Problems
On States Right.
| And, in this connection. it might be
well for the proponents of this court
packing scheme, who started their
campaign by taking the name Of
Thomas Jefferson in vain, to remem-
ber that Jeffersons bitterness against
the Supreme Court was provoked by
| the very thing they now advocate
| Jefferson condemned the court for
| its failure to void the unbridled
actions of Congress in invading the
rights OF States, where the court
| packers are incenSed against the
court for restraining the unconstitu-
tional actions Of Congress in disre-
garding individual and community
rights. Their position is in sharp
antagonism to that of Jefferson, who
never dreamed of packing the Su-
preme Court to compel obedience to
/ his views. Evidently Jefferson thought,
as Woodrow Wilson afterward pro-
claimed, that such thing involved
constitutional immortality"
I venture to beg the public not to
be diverted from the real issue in
volved in this controversy. Contest
ing the courts constitutional authority
to void acts of Congress is idle sur
| pluSage. The court has exercised
this implied power for 130 years. 1t
has been regarded as an indispensable
! power in government under a written
Constitution. There must be q
supreme tribunal to which every citi-
zen, high or humble, rich or poor
may appeal for the vindication OF his
rights and the preservation Of life,
liberty and property. Long before the
Supreme Court was established this
principle was presented by Chancellor
Wythe, Jef1erson's law teacher, with
respect to acts OF Parliament and
DEGREES OF the Crown. 1t is q waste
Of time to discuss now this and other
moot questions not touched In the
remotest sense by the pending propo-
sltion. Under the bill sent up to
Congress, prepared by God knows
whom. the six substitute justices
would exercise the established power
to rule finally on the acts Of Con-
gress, and the dangerous circumstance
faces the Nation that We know pretty
we'll in advance what their rulings
would be. The question Of majority
or other numerical decisions Is not
comprehended in the White House
proposal, nor the right OF Congress
to review and reverse the courts
decisions. The predominant question
is whether the practice Of . century
under an independent judiciary is to
be abruptly terminated by authoriz-
ing the President to seize the court
by the process Of packing in order tc
compel agreement with the Execu-
tive views Should this be done
without "a mandate from the people?
Should the people be ignored and
without asking their consent In the
| usual Way. submit helplesSly to hay.