Obrázky stránek
PDF
ePub

lessons of history does not indicate a disbelief in the proposition that the people are, and must always continue to be, the only source of political power. Webster did not indulge in exaggeration when he asserted that "Whoever says, or speaks as if he thought, that anybody looks to any other source of political power in this country than the people, must have a stronger and wilder imagination (than Don Quixote), for he sees nothing but the creations of his own fancy. He stares at phantoms"; but, at the same time, he uttered a solemn admonition against "the sudden impulses of mere majorities," and said that it was the "great conservative principle" established by the American people, "in constituting form's of government, that they should secure what they had established against hasty changes by mere majorities." We must, therefore, not be deterred by the oft-repeated, but unfounded, charge that we do not trust the people and we must approach a consideration of the doctrine of the recall of decisions from the standpoint of historical instances, philosophical reflections and confidence in our institutions. We must not fail to deal with it seriously, because it appeals to many people sincerely seeking to improve social and industrial conditions, who have been misguided by partisan appeal; and our efforts must be unremitting because the recall is pressed by persons whose influence in our community is so potent as to make even such a heresy, when advocated by them, a real menace.

The recall cannot be dismissed without grave consideration, merely because there is ground to think that it has been put forward for some temporary or ulterior political purpose; for it is too subtle, too plausible in its superficial aspects and too dangerous in those which lurk beneath the surface. It should be

combatted by every resource at our command. Especially should members of our own noble profession avoid being lulled into inactivity by their convictions that, because the recall is so revolutionary, therefore it is impossible; for the real character and effect of the doctrine is more clear to us than to those who have fewer occasions to consider the importance of maintaining the balance of the different parts of the Constitution. It will not do to content ourselves with reiterating the formula that the judiciary must be independent and the restraints of the Constitution must be preserved. We must be prepared also to give reasons and stimulate thought among the people. This is a task that the lawyer can perform intelligently, sympathetically and patriotically. He need surround the courts with no undue sanctity, for none better than he should know that judges are human, that in their administration of justice their acts should be subjected to the closest scrutiny, and that if their procedure is too slow or too expensive or too technical, it should be rigidly reformed. But he also knows that the preservation in our governmental system of an absolutely independent judiciary as a restraint upon the too impulsive or the too frequent exercise of the supreme political power is essential to the continued life of the nation; and he should not grow weary in conveying that message to his fellow citizens.

STATE CONTROL OF NAVIGABLE WATERS

ΧΙ

STATE CONTROL OF NAVIGABLE WATERS 1

A RECENT issue of the Review 2 contained a discussion of the decision of the Court of Appeals in the case of Long Sault Development Company v. Kennedy. A consideration of the effect of that decision upon the development of our waterways for commercial purposes may have some interest.

In 1907 the legislature passed an act incorporating the Long Sault Development Company and authorizing it to construct a gigantic dam across the St. Lawrence River, at the famous Long Sault Rapids. The project contemplated the expenditure of $35,000,000 in the improvement of navigation and the creation of a water power capable of generating electrical energy to the extent of four or five hundred thousand horse power. Governor Hughes refused to sign the bill as it was first passed by the legislature because it did not provide for participation by the state in the profits of the enterprise. Accordingly it was redrawn so as to provide that after 1911 a minimum annual payment of $25,000 should be made to the state, and that after the power plant was in operation the state should receive at the rate of 25 cents per clectrical horse power generated in excess of 100,000 of such horse power. Thus amended the act was passed and signed by Governor Hughes. Besides paying annually the amounts prescribed by the act, the company has expended nearly

1 Reprinted from Columbia Law Review for May, 1915.

2 Columbia Law Review, 68.

3 (1914) 212 N. Y. 1. The case has been taken on writ of error to the Supreme Court of the United States.

4 N. Y. Laws of 1907, c. 355.

« PředchozíPokračovat »