The times-news. [volume] (Hendersonville, N.C.) 1927-current, 1937-03-16


program to increase the perSohhe
of the United States supreme
eourt.-Editor'S NOtc.)
By JAMES TRUSLoW ADAMS
Good evening: The question
which have TO discuss tonight
should be entirely nOn-partlSan'
What | have 10 say | would say
in the same words If Mr. Landon
had been elected and if he were
attempting 20 do what Mr.. Roose'
Welt is. because il is question
not of temporary policies but OF
the fundamental form of our gov
eminent itself. IL is question
not TO be settled by president OF
congress OF the Democratic or Re
publican parties but only by the
American people. The question is
of the freedom of that court
which i'm the last resort Is the sole
bulwark of our personal liberties
These are guaranteed TO US IN
the constitution. A century and a
half ago we thought great deal
about them because we had had
70 fight for them. We thought so
much about them that We insisted
on passing ten amendments TO the
original constitution. 10 make sure
that We should ALWAYS have
them. Among them were freedom
of religion and worship, of the
press and speech, of the right oil
assembly. and many others. Read
| beg of you. those first ten
amendments carefully, and then
consider what might happen TO
your private lives If at any time
AN administration could pass laws
taking away those liberties and
If there were no independent
courts TO defend you.
We take these liberties too
much for granted today. We have
not felt personally what it means
not TO have them. They are like
the air we breathe. We give no
thought TO il, but let US not be
deceived. The Europe of today
tells different story. Even UNI
der our present general form OF
government if we make the exc
cutive or congress, or both, su-
preme over the constitution, with
no check by the courts, our safe
ty and liberty are gone. We shall
have placed our neckS in a moose.
Why do we have a written con-
stitutiOn and supreme court TO
decide. as only one of its many
functions. on the conStitutionality
of legislation? When states unite,
as our thirteen did, TO form n
union, some written agreement
must be made as to the relations
between them and the central
government. Our constitution is
practically made up Of two parts,
one of which settles what powers
the federal government shall have,
what the individual states shall
have, and the form of govern
ment in Washington with the pow
ers delegated 10 each of its three
sections. The other part of the
constitution details the liberties
otS the individual citizen already
mentioned, All powers not given
to the federal government or, the
states. including the power now
in question to alter the constitu-
ton, are reserved 10 us ourselves,
the American people. No one can
constitutioRally change our fun
damental law but ourselves.
But what is that law? It is
the constitution, and in any COM
pick state there must be SOME
body which is the umpire when
the problem arises as 10 what Is
constitutional and what is not.
Who will the umpire be? II pres
ident tries TO take away our free
dom Of speech, if congress takes
away our property unlawfully, II
a state legislature, as in the re-
cent case of Louisiana under the
dictatorship of Huey Long, takes
away the freedom of the press,
who is 10 save us except the
courts? The Anglo-Saxon race
in the British empire and the
United States has been the most
successful in the difficult art OF
self-governmcnt, and everywhere
it has given this power of inter-
preting the constitution TO a SUI
pfemc court. Canada and Austria
liza each has supreme court
which performs the same function
as ours. The Judiciary committee
of the Priyy Council in England
acts as the same sort of supreme
court for the empire, and has on
IL lately declared certain Cana
dian acts unconstitutional. Our
written constitution and our SUI
preme court are not peculiar to
the United States. They have
been found essential in every fed
eraI union. Such a government
needs an umpire somewhere Just
nj much as baseball does. It Is
obvious that an umpire must be
impartial. What good would an
umpire in ball game be II nc
were TO be bought by one side OF
the'sother, or physically threaten
ed or told that if he did not give
the desired decision he would DC
chucked out in the middle of the
game, or that two other umpires
Would be put in TO vote with nm
who WOULD give the decision as
ordered? ~, :.
No man is infalible, and it is
true that our opinions on even
the most obStruse matters are to
some extent colored by our gen
eral' outlook but / think too much
is made of the five-to-four deci-
sinsI Ga small minority after all
Of the supreme courts total con-
sttutional decisions). Much is
heard of these, but the NRA de-
cision was nine TO nothing, and
AL.lA - 80