Evening star., 1937-03-02
New Phase in Court Issue
Permissive Retirement of Justices May Invoke
Blunt Invitations to Depart.

sign and receive full pay. The old
law providing this has been on the
books since 1869. Under it justices
have resigned and received full pay
for life. The difference between the
existing law about designations, and
tn new one about retiring is a techni-
cal distinction between resign" and
retre"-the distinction Is too COM
plex to explain here. Under the ex-
isting resignation law it would be
possible for some future Congress to
end the full pay Of resigned" jus
tice. Under the new retirement law a
retired" justice Is guaranteed full
pay without possibility Of reduction
by any future Congress. That Is the
only change made by the new law.
Also, resigned" justice would have
to pay income tax, while a retired"
justice would not. But substantially,
as respects pay after leaving the
bench there Is no more reason why
a justice should quit now than there
was last week, or last month, or last
year or the year before.
So that opportunity to receive full
pay for life is not, in any material
sense, a factor in the present situa-
ton. But We can safely anticipate the
Presidents partisans will try to make
1t seem factor.
Age Factor Present.
There Is another reason why no
justice should retire now. They were
accused by the President OF being
too old. To prove his accusation he
said they were behind with their work.
He didn't really quite say that. but he
so adroitly built up his statement to
imply it that everybody assumed he
had said it. His assertion was prompt
ly disproved-the disproof consisting
in part Of recent words from Mr..
Roosevelt's own Attorney General and
solicitor general, in their latest an
nual report. It was this adroitness
by the President, in part. that caused
Walter Lippman to describe his state
ment as misleading" and hollow"
and Miss Dorothy Thompson to de-
scribe it as trick" and the New
York Times to describe it as political
sharp practice" and the loyal Scripps-
Howard papers to describe it as too
damned clever" and the even more
loyal Gen. Hugh johnson to describe
it as too damned slick"
Here, then, is the situation: The
President charged the justices with
being too old and behind with their
work. The charge has been dsproved.
In that situation, is any justice now
going to retire?
have written all this mainly to
make it clear that the new measure
permitting voluntary retirement by
justices has no relation to the Presi-
dents measure for compulsory change
Of the court, except the coincidence
that the new measure happened to be
pending at the time the President
brought forward his proposal. have
written 1t for the further purpose Of
making clear that the new measure
creates no substantial new reason for
any justice to retire. The new law
was not intended to put any pressure
on any justice. If it Is used for that
purpose, that will be merely another
example Of adroitness. The new meas
ure is permissive wholly. and it was
written and passed merely to clarity
a policy which has been on the statute
books since 1869.
Justices Become q Symbol.
So far as the present retirement of
any justice is brought into discussion
there is q consideration which rises
above the age Of the justices, or the
individual convenience of any who
might feel like retiring. The justices
have been made. by the Presidents
attack, the symbol Of a cause. the
cause Of the independence of the
judiciary In this cause many mil
lions of Americans have enlisted. The