Evening star., 1937-07-17
Sad Situation of the
Court Bill Defenders
To the EDITOR Of The Star:

pOitiCuA OatIlc Will Wc4EONS lOE
political purposes. The occasion Of the
President power to control the Supreme
Court and thereby change the Constitu-
ton without consent of the people But
these Senators do not mention the terms
OF the. bill. So far as discussion OF its
provisions is concerned, 1t might just as
we'll be 4 bill to authorize construction
OF ten million dollar post once in the
rock ribbed Democratic community Of
Poduck Crossroads.
Fer the Senators in question the real
issue Is not any particular bill, but the
higher and broader principle OF party and
personal loyalty in the realm OF politics.
Hence we hear much OF political graft
tude" and political ingratitude," and
strong support OF the thesis that those
who ride into Congress on the Presi-
dents coat-tails should keep themselves
under his feet while there. Political
independence" and political ingrati-
tude' are shown to be synonymous
terms. II questions about the court
packing compromise are irrelevantly and
trreverently raised by the opposition, the
Senator interrogated coldly refuses to
discuss details, or hotly yields the floor
rather than respond.
1t is most interesting exhibition of
parliamentary procedure But those
tempted to criticize the Senators respon-
siole for 1t should give thought to the
circumstances in which the Senators
md themselves. Consider for 4 mo-
ment the heavy aud thankless task
which has devolved on loyal admins
tratlon supporters. The court packing
10 ~ ~ hat
posedly the Nations lawmakers. they
were not even consulted about this most
revolutionary OF all proposed laws. Their
sole responsibility has been to revamp,
under administration pressure the pro-
PoSAl killed by an aroused public opin-
ion. Neither now nor in the past has
the court measure been in any proper
sense party measure; for their partv
specifically pledged itself to submit to
the people 4 constitutional amendment
II new powers were found necessary.
Party loyalty. as well as every considers
ton OF honesty and public decency. COM
mands them to oppose the bill.
For its dangerous provisions thew have
no love. Some of them publicly. and
many more privately, early denounced
the court-packing idea. They are fully
aware OF the popular belief that il they
were guided solely by conscience the
Administration could not count 4 respec-
able handful of favorable votes. They
know Mr.. Farley has insolently boasted
that their votes will be delivered at the
proper time; and this adds neither com.
tort nor dignity to their position before
an aroused public.
They realize that the arguments which
defeated the original court bill were un-
ansWerable, and that they lie with equal
force against the so-called "compromise
Lacking arguments to support the COM
promise on its merits, they find them
selves forced to avoid all discussions of
the terms of the bill The sole ground on
Wnlch support for the measure can be-
baseo Is personal loyalty to the President
who lmpulsively adopted and sponsored
the all too clever scheme concocted bv
his youthful lieutenants. The doctrine
OF personal loyalty they accept, making A
political virtue Of what they doubtless
deem political necessity. But they do
so with secret misgivinRs since thev
cannot uphold the theory that Senators
should bindy follow the bidding of the
President be he right or wrong. with
out destroying the last possible excuse
Tor their own existence as legislators.
The sole strategy avails BILE to them
Is to attack the disloyalty of those who
oppose the court measure. and they know
1ull we'll their disadvantage in 4 battle
IN which those who are "disloyal" have
tne courage to risk political feprisals,
loss OF patronage and even the destruc-
ton OF their careers in order to cham
plon traditional principles Of American
Tree government. while they themselves
must face the charge that executive
pressure and political rewards have die
tated their loyalty in following
President who has committed the fatal
error OF trying TO secure by devious
methods what he feared he could not
secure by direct consent OF the people
Assuredly, then. administration SUD-
porters of the iniquitous court bill have
anything but . happy lot. Let due al
iowance accordingly be made for the
strange air of unreality that surrounds
their tactics When Senator Hatch
signs his name to a report vigorously
condemning the Presidents proposal be-
cause 1t "apples force to the judiciary
undermines the independence of
the courts permits alteration of
the Constitution without the peoples
consent or approval undermines
the protection our constitutional system
gives to minorities and is subversive of
the rights of individuals" and then
promptly facing in the opposite direc-
ton offers a compromise" which ac-
complishes every one OF these things
quite as effectively as the original bill
although somewhat more SLOWLY. he
should not be condemned too severely.
1t is no simple matter to oppose court
packing to please the people and favor
court-packing to please the President.
When Senator Logan declares that the
court proposal carries out pledges of
the Democratic platform. it would be
ungracious to remind him that the
platform said not one word about chang
ing the court. but did specifically pledge
the Democratic party to submit a con-
stitutional amendment If new powers
were needed. When Senator Guffev
yields the floor rather than reply to
searching questions respecting his rea-
sons for supporting the court bill, that
sorely harassed Senator should be pitied,
The task of defending an indefensible
measure. and Of answering unanswerable
arguments, Is q dificult and thankless
task.
Perhaps As the days pass and the
cohorts of personal loyalty begin to
realize that the swelling wave of public
Indignation will either defeat the vicious
compromise measure or sweep them out
of Office, they will revise their definition
Of loyalty. They may decide that low