Milford chronicle., 1937-06-25
Dissertations On The Proposals Of The President
To Change The Personnel Of The Judges

| purpose Oh SUSTAINING leE1SIatiO
deemed by them as essential unde
the Constitution for the genera
welfare, but which the judges as in
strumentalities of judicial action ar
bitrarily have struck down. 1t
possible for a minority of the State
and people not only long to della
but finally to prevent formal amend
ment to the Constitution as constru
ed by an arbitrary Supreme Cour
which persists in nullifying the pop
ular will. Judicial usurpation in tn,
nature of a stubborn determination
arbitrarily to thwart Legislation
deemed constitutional by the execu.
tive, by a majority of Congress and
by a majority of the people on ref
eTendum even If made a count In
impeachment proceedings is so diff
cult of proof as to make improbable
conviction and removal of the Of
Tending judges. 1t would then seem
that the only remedy under the Con-
stitution which a majority of the
States and people have against the
usurpation of judges by arbitrary
persistent and wrongful interpreta-
tion, is the creation by the people
through their Representatives in Con-
gress and the President of new
judges with different attitudes of
mind and new concepts of life rela-
tiOns. 1t is this safety valve Which
the fathers in wisdom provided as
the alternative to violent revolution
and by which a growing and ever
expanding Constitution may be Vi
talized by adapting it to new condi-
tions and relations, with identity of
meaning and certainty Of its appli-
cation to situations now as when
ordained by the people.
In the knowledge of the nature of
the attacks made on the Supreme
Court because of its decision in three
leading cases, each of which invol-
we'd property interests of magnitude
(e. G., a deliberate conspiracy to pro-
tect property in slaves, the creation
and appointment of new judges SYM
pathetic to legalizing fiat money,
and the reversal of opinion of a
ju6ge on arbitrary reargument to
prevent the imposition of income
taxes), it cannot be said that such
always has been or will be the per-
sonnel of the judges and so impec-
cant their judicial acts, either of
method or of decision, as to pre- |
,lude the fact or the probability or
he suspicion that the arbitrary will
Of a Judge or unworthy personal
motives or public considerations
)ther than of justice, have thwarted .
,r will thwart the popular will by !
declaring unconstitutional statutes /
witch a dominant majority believes
o be constitutional.
The President grounds the instant
to increase the number OF
udges of the Supreme Court on
hree propositions: (I That the ad-
'anced age of some of the sitting
judges burdens and delays the ad- !
of Justice; and (2) the
that because of the in
lination of age to cling to the old
he elder judges purposively have
eclared by arbitrary Interpretation
Constitution contrary to the Presi-
ent's conception of its meaning,
TLich conception (3) he further as
umes is in exact coincidence with
he Constitution as understood by
he great mass of the people whose
mandate he has to make new judges
hat his conception of the Constitu-
ion shall prevail.
1t did not require the conclusive
tatement of the Chief Justice to
the diligence and COM {
etency of the Supreme Court and to
lduce a discerning public to sus-.
ect that the imputation of its de-
ay might be a subterfuge to mask
deeper purpose fraught with peril
} the continuance under the Con- !
titution of representative demo-
racy.
The Presidents assumptions that
he Supreme Court by arbitrary in !
has usurped the peoples {
rerogative and wrongfully has ]
the Constitution and that
e, without antecedent referendum
} the people, holds their mandate
} repeal its Ito him) odious judicial {
is in truth the feared {
word that may cut the Achilles ten
On of American constitutional gov I
l
However divergent the respective q
of the Supreme {
0urt and the President as to con-
itutional limitations and however
any the citizens are who accept I
lie Presidents assumptions, there 6
e many more missions of Ameri- 4
ms who repudiate them because of !
cir confidence in the integrity of 8
e courts and in the loyalty of the n
dges to their oaths to maintain the
institution as their minds under h
and and their conscience apply its d
nitations to Federal and State leg O
Iation. 1t is thi sadmitted diversity p
opinion on this momentous issue "
at makes it imperative for the C
'esident to submit to the people 8
e question of the truth of his fac v
al assumption of judicial usurpa- b
IN by purposive and arbitrary in II
rpretation if he would avoid the h
spicion or escape the condemna- e.
IN of making proposals in studied s
;regard of the peoples preroga-
e by their act to change their Con- o.
tuition. Il
The national platform of the DEM VI
ratSc party and, during his can fs
IS, the President repeatedly de- nj
red for formal amendment as the ei
nedy against the Supreme Courts p'
expectation of the Constitution. D,
ither the President nor any of his in