Our Supreme Court

From the Lansing State Hepubllcan. The tendency which we note to thoughtlessly and recklessly critiuise our coarta whenever, perchance, ao opinión is hamled down which does not meet the approval of certain classes or interests, it seeins to us, is one o i the most reprehensible tendeneies o f the day. The courts are the arbitrators of all the delicate and important functions of government, and it is of the highest importanee that confldence in their integrity nul cheerful acceptance of their decisions shall at all times be impressed upon the public mind. Probably uo other declaration in the Chicago platform contri buted more to the defeat of the nomiuee of that party than the resolution intended to reflect upon and impugn the integrity of the suprema court of the United States, and very properly so. It bas been the rare good fortune of the state of Michigan, from the beginning to the present time, to have a preine court which has commanded the unbouuded eonfidence of all our people. At home and abroad our court lias been universally recognized, during all these years, as beiug the peer of any court in the land for ability and integrity; and never more so than now. Indeed, it may be truthfully said that the high reputation which our court has sustained for its uprightness, great learning and judicial wisdom bas been one of the chief glories of the state. Bearing these universally conceded facts in mind, every good citizen should feel like resenting any wanton or acrimonious reflection upon our court of last resort. Possibly it is quite natural for litigante, who have cases decided against them, to disagree with the findings of the court and not accept the resulta with equanimity. But when such litigant presumes to go so far as to reiiect upon the integrity of such a court as adonis our supreme bencb, ít strikes us that the time lias come when a lialt sliould be called. These thoughts liave found utterance because of the unseemly reflecions that have been made apon thef court, growing out of the recent deci1 sionhanded down in connectkm witli tlie mayoraity eontest in Detroit. We believe that practically every attorney of repute in the state will uphold the court in its interpretation of the law in thia case. Indeed, we think that section 15 of article 5 of the constitution of Michigan makes it so clear that a man cannot lioli the office of mayor and of governor at the same time, that there cannot well be any controversy regarding it. But even though there were reasons for difference apon this suliject, it is certainly reprehensible to attack the integrity of the court. because of the decisión. For men occupying prominent positions in official ïife to do so is to set a bad example for the ignorant and vicious of society, and thersfore their actions should be frowned upon by all law-abiding people. In this connection we cannot forbear to cominend Justice Long for the fidelity to duty he displayed in sittiii}; in this case. Notwithstanding liis election was pending, he sliowed the age of bis convictions by not avoiding his duty. Had lie been weak and craven, he would have fonnd a good excuse íor escaping responsibility. But the same fldelity of purpose, lieroic courage and fearless uprightness that caused liiin as a lad to sacrifice au arm apon the altar of his country, forbade tliat he should shirk his duty in this instance. However mueli people mijiht disagree with tlie decisión of the court, they should all admire him for the rectitude and stamina he exhibited. No better evidence could be given to demónstrate that he is entitled to tlie enconiiuin of being a just and upright judge. It ill be a sad day inde d for Michigan when the people fail to recognize sucli qualities by maintaining men of this character upon their snpreme bench. It not unfrequent y happens that courte are malled upon tu decide imstions in regard (o which there may !" Bucli división of public sentiment, 'tlial only.the well balanced judicial niin.is i-m approacli theni without reluctance and embarrassment. Just in proportion as courts are independent, Savlesa and honest, they will discharge sucli duiios without heaítation or evasión. All who reflect upon the subject ut all will agree that no pn ealamity could Ix-fall a state than to be encumbered with a supreme cour!, weak, vacillating and cowardly enougli to gander to the passing prejudices oj the hour, or to be swerved from judicial rectitude at the beliest of political expediency or dictation.