OCR Text |
Show H H HOW THE REACTIONARIES CONTRADICT THEMSELVES 1 ON THE RECALL. Hj In a long, labored articlo the editor of the Salt Lake Hcrald- H Republican attempts a display of wisdom on the subject of the re- H call of judges. After referring to the demand for the recall as H idiocy, the Salt Lake paper prodeeds to prove that the judiciary M tocia' is in part venal and corrupt and many of the judges are m owned by the corporate interests, while others are so given to B adhering to the form of the law as to entirely overlook its sub- M stance. H As evidence of the abuse of judicial power, the Herald-Re- Hl publican presents the following. k M "Not long since an employe of a public service corporation H who had lost a limb in the performance of his employment sued to j (recover damages. A jury of eight men awarded $4,000 to the H crippled employe, whoso power to earn a livelihood had been seri- H ously impaired or totally removed. The amount of damages was a H question of opinion, inasmuch as the law clearly showed the offend- H lug corporation to be responsible and the only issue was as to the H amount of. remuneration to which the plaintiff was entitled. The H judge, whose corporation tendencies amount to an obsession, rc- H marked to the attorney for the employe that unless he would coasent HJ to $2,000 being stricken from the judgment he would grant the dc- H fendant a new trial. Hl "Facing the alternative of a new trial before an evidently H prejudiced judge with an uncertain jury, or a compensation for H his client only half of what eight men thought he should have, ho H chose the latter horn of the dilemma. This subservient judicial tool H of the public service company had saved his owners $2,000; un- m doubtedly it is worth a great deal to that company to own such ai m powerful creature, and the amount of money it would expend to H re-elect him to that powerful coignc of vantage, can be well M imagined. H "Who made this jurist the judge of tlie amount of damages H, to which this employe was entitled? What vested in him the un- H. erring capacity of determining the degree of injury sustained by a H! workingman who found himself practically incapacitated to earn a H livelihood? The judge, most laymen believe, is on the bench to Hl decide as to the law, to require that the trial be conducted accord- H ing to the statutes and the rules of practice; the jury, it is sup- HI posed, is empanelled to decide as to the facts. H "There is good reason to consider the eight jurors eminently H more capable of deciding as to the proper amount of compensation H than the lone judge whose knowledge of the law may be amazing H but whose ignorance of actual facts may be equally as astonishing. H The damages sustained, for instance, by an electrician who "had lost H his leg and,who would be able in the future to pursue his trade but tentatively, if at all, is a matter of opinion; it cannot be ac-' curately calculated in dollars and cents. Tho eight jurors, chosen from as many walks in life, certainly are more likely to strike a reasonable average than the judge who may know Blackstone, Ooko and Littleton, but whpse human sympathies have long since deserted the tenement in which they were repressed and whose heart has become be-come as atrophied as his scared conscience." The ITcrald-RcpublTcau cites the case of a judge who protected the interests of his rich masters' by plncing technical obstacles in the way of quick determination of cases before him. making impossible im-possible any successful prosecution or defense by poor litigants because of the prohibitive cost of court actions. The Ilerald-Rcpublican finally reaches this conclusion: "Judges who must return to the people at the end of their tenure of office can be controlled by the people if they will but examine their records and then vote their convictions unhampered by corporation influence. "As to the federal judges, the occupants of the United States district bench, no such 'remedy applies to them, but it should. They should be elected or appointed for a definite period in order that t'hey may be removed when they become fossilized, atrophied, deaf to the appeals of justice and blind to the needs of humanity. Under the present system it is necessary to replace them when they die, physically ; some of them die mentally years before the heart ceases to beat and they should be removed when that occurs." The Salt Lake paper, in its rambling way, has become lost in a maze of contradictious. Starling out with the assertion that the recall of judges is madness, it winds up by declaring that federal judges, under certain conditions, should be recalled, or rather, removed, re-moved, which -is tantamount to being recalled. Furthermore, it tells how judges can be controlled by the people being more circumspect cir-cumspect when tho men of the bench are up for re-election. Inasmuch In-asmuch as the passing on the worthiness of the judges who seek re-election calls for no higher qualifications on the part ot the voters vot-ers than would be exercised in the recall and is in itself a form of recall, how can any one advocating the merits of such a system, and recognizing tho advantages, consistently term tho recall an idiocy? |