Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 23.pdf/610

 570

The Qeen Bag

in the judicial administration of this country.

When we analyze this situation we cannot fail to discover that part of these diﬂiculties in our present situation grow

out of our depreciation of the judicial oﬂice. Reference has already been made to the tremendous prestige of the judge and its potent result in the effective and speedy administration of justice in the English courts. In this country, with our short terms, meagre salaries and pro hibition of any discretionary power of the court in charging the jury, we have

in effect made the trial judge but an um pire between contending counsel. We cannot hope to remedy this situation un til we enlarge and dignify the position of

the judge, until we place in the judiciary the power of making rules for the con

duct of the business of the courts, and recognize the rightful discretionary

cannot be overlooked in a discussion of the future development of our juris prudence. With a few exceptions, the system of a judiciary elected by the people prevails in all the states of this country. It is not my purpose to discuss the merits and demerits of the elected or appointed systems. This much is clear, however; that the selection of

judges in a country of written con stitutions, where the courage and inde pendence of the judiciary are essential to

private and public security, requires the supreme exercise of intelligence and selfrestraint on the part of the people. The judges selected by popular vote for the highest state courts in the states of the United States have, as a rule, ranked

high in ability and character, and have compared well with those selected by the appointive system in the federal courts; and these facts bear eloquent

power of the courts in determining in

testimony to the high and discriminat

what causes they should give the reasons of their judgments. It is no- doubt true

ing intelligence of the American people

that the statutory requirements in many

states and the general practice of written opinions by appellate courts, was based upon considerations of public policy. A written opinion was evidence of a proper

consideration of the cause. That is well enough in its way, but it must yield to the primal consideration of the prompt

and eﬂicient administration of justice. You doubtless have heard of the drastic remedy proposed in the California consti tution, which required every judge to make an aﬂidavit before he drew his salary, that he had had no case under advisement longer than ninety days.

Reference has been made to the vast diﬂerence between the position of the

judiciary in this country and in England and Canada, and the profound inﬂuence

this has had, particularly in the ques tion of the reform of procedure. There is another phase of this question which

in the performance of this supreme duty of citizenship in the selection of their judiciary. Not only learning and ability, but also independence and fearlessness in the discharge of judicial duty, are es sential for the security of private rights, and in this country, for the integrity of our political institutions. Such a proposition as that of the recall applied to the judiciary, whereunder the discharge of judicial duty would be subject to the continuing threat of dismissal

in case of popular disapproval of the performance of duty, I cannot but think is a direct blow to the judicial

independence which is an essential to our political system, and would certainly aggravate the existing imperfections in the administration of justice. The true remedy, therefore, lies not

in the further depreciation of the judi cial oﬂice, but on the contrary in its elevation and increased dignity.

We