Manawatu Evening Standard. WEDNESDAY, AUG. 11, 1937. COURT REFORM.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LVII, Issue 215, 11 August 1937, Page 8

Manawatu Evening Standard. WEDNESDAY, AUG. 11, 1937. COURT REFORM.

Less than nine months after he had been returned to White House with the greatest popular majority ever recorded in American political history Mr Roosevelt tasted the bitterness of a great defeat when the Senate rejected by 70 votes to 20 his proposals for the reform of the Supreme Court. Mr Roosevelt sought to remove an obstruction to the legislation implementing his New Deal social reform measures. Not only did he place his Judiciary Bill at the head of his legislative programme on Congress reassembling at the beginning of the year, but lie emphasised during the time the Bill was under debate that he regarded its enactment as vital to the successful development of his policy. His proposals gave him power to appoint, until the total number of Judges reached 15, one new Justice for each member of the Supreme Court—now fixed at nine—who should not have resigned within six months of his seventieth birthday. As the Court at present includes six Judges over seventy years of age, his plan would have given the President authority to rema a constitutional branch of the Government. The six new appointees together with those at present on the Bench who could be counted upon to support the New Deal legislation would have provided a clear majority. Mr Roosevelt, however, in spite of his triumphant return which must have convinced him that the steps he intended taking to secure the passage of his New Deal legislation were not misplaced, badly misjudged the temper of both. Congress and the country when he put forward his very drastic plan for the Judiciary’s reform. Veneration for the Supreme Court, it has been observed, has long been a cardinal article of American political faith, but though on previous occasions Presidents and Congresses have altei’ed the size of the Supreme Court, sometimes with a political motive, they have never done so with a motive so deliberate and to such an extent as Mr Roosevelt proposed. It was contended that Mr Roosevelt should have sought instead a constitutional amendment to widen the sphere of Federal action. Even his most enthusiastic supporters disliked his Court proposals and offered compromises, but the President demanded his Bill and nothing elseThe fact, however, that since the President put forward .his plan the Supreme Court had taken a much more liberal view of the Constitution and had not only validated several measures, such as the Social Security Act, the Wanner Labour Relations Act, and the Farm Mortgage Act, but

had also reversed its previous veto on minimum wage legislation, did not escape attention and did much indeed to strengthen the opposition to the Bill. The .Senate has now passed a compromise Bill, its passage being effected during a lull in the debate before opposition members of the Senate could offer their amendments. It is not clear, however, to what extent this measure will assist the President in Securing the passage of vital legislation. It may be taken lor granted that in no way is the Supreme Court seriously affected. It is worthy of note that not only has the controversy that raged around the former Bill caused a somewhat serious split in the Democratic Party’s ranks, but the President’s entire legislative programme was held up for six months. His defeat certainly affected his prestige, but Mr Roosevelt suffered similar reverses during his first Administration and never once failed to restore his command over the nation. He is very popular throughout the whole country, and though his plan to reform the Supreme Court, well intentioned but: unwise though it was, has failed and he must be content with a compromise measure which may be quite valueless for his purposes, there is no reason to believe his popularity has diminished.