The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 1912. REVOLUTIONARY PROPOSALS.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1434, 8 May 1912, Page 6

The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 1912. REVOLUTIONARY PROPOSALS.

• An American Presidential campaign as a rule commands the attention of the outside world mainly by its eccentricities and excesses; by the prolonged clamor and hubbub apparently necessary in the selection of candidates to be submitted at tho party conventions in June, to be followed by upwards of four months' strenuous campaigning during which time the whole country is thrown into turmoil, and business and other legitimate concerns made to suffer serious and vexatious disturbance. Rarely are the issues involved in a Presidential contest of an international character; they are chiefly domestic, and abroad excite only a passive and incurious interest. This year, however, is an exception and the spectacle in America is one which, in view of the widespread social unrest is likely to cause thoughtful people .throughout the world a certain degree of apprehension and mistrust. T/ic Times o£ London the other day in commenting on tho campaign said the gravest issues were at stake. "If tho political power," continued The Times, "which State Courts derive from their present rights of interpreting the law be an offence against tho democracy, will not the lime come when the political power conferred on the Supreme Court by the Federal Constitution also seem ail offence f Mn. Roosevelt's policy is calculated to raise these speculations, hence the horror wherewith they are met." This grave and deliberate utterance refers to what may perhaps be regarded as the most dangerous and revolutionary proposals ever placed before the people of the United States or of any other democracy. The proposals in question are the recall of Judges and the recall of judicial decisions. In the former, the recall of Judges, it is proposed to provide by law that whenever a Judge has so dischaigcd his duties as to induce a cortain percentage of the electorate to deem it wise to remove him and that percentage sign a petition asking Ins recall, an election shall lake place in which (In' .fudge shall stand against oilier candidates, and if lie does not .secure a majority of voles, he is bv that means removed. I lie recail ot indicia! camion?. was intorproM .by Phesipeni T/U'X in a recent flpecoh

to iiu'/tvi thafc ''when the Supreme Court Ims found a law, intended to sewire a public benefit, to hi- invalid because it infringes some constitutional limitation, the decision is to he submitted to a vote of the electors und if a majority of them differ from tlie Court and reverse the decision the law is to be regarded and enforced as valid and constitutional." This interpretation is somewhat obscure to those not familiar with American jurisprudence and could have been made plainer had Jilt. Tait supposed an instance in which a specific test could have been applied, bui, in brief it means that a comparatively small faction of electors would he given_ the poivnr lo over-rule the Constitution of the United States —the system of fundamental principles framed by the founders of tho Republic according to which the nation is constituted and governed. The Constitution is cherished as a perfect document setting forth a perfect system of government and it is the attempt by iM ii. Iloosevf.lt to destroy the Constitution which is the very foundation and essence of American government that is causing such _ tremendous agitation. It is the limitless use of the recall that makes the measure so dangerous. As The Times points out it might in course extend to the Supreme Court and then the whole structure of government and law and order •in the United States would in danger of being overthrown and in their place he set un a virtual anarchy tempered by some form of organisation. President Taht is not lacking in courage and straightforwardness in pointing out the fallacies and dangers contained in the recall proposal. In a carefully prepared address referring to the United States and with the recall specifically in mind he said: "This is incontcstably the most lawless of tho more advanced countries. Our annual record of murders is incomparable in its hideous and appalling length. Our lynchings and burnings at the stake in brazen defiance of the machinery of justice are easily the most staggering exhibit "of modern civilisation. The spirit of obedience is nowhere seen to be a notable characteristic of American life, eitner in the younger or elder generation. In this estimate of his country s lawlessness President Taft docs not stand alone, but has with him_ a considerable body of public opinion determined to oppose and destroy once and for all the threatening tide of anarchist agitation against the judiciary which, if' successful in its purpose, would Bring about an infinitely worse condition of things. The securing of a stronger judiciary and a better judicial procedure cannot be left to the mob or _ accomplished by impulse or passion. It can only be readied after careful research and study by men of experience, trained and best oualified to determine grave judicial and constitutional rights. As the /ivciiiiig Post of New York remarks: '1 ho idea that we can secure for the Bench a body of able, impartial, self-assertive, and independent Judges by the childish expedient of once in a while thrusting out with ignominy one whom the people wish to get rid of is hardly calculated to appeal to the average American s business intelligence. ' And it is more than likely that this sentiment will be expressed very forcibly by the party delegates at tho Juno conventions and later by tho nation at the general election in November.