◆ SpookStack

em ¢ 38 8Tat@-wila frce of moral do . ‘any kind, The views of Justices Douglas and Black rule out the Guarantees of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United Btates which protect the individual's inalienable rights and the jurisdiction of the states. The philosophy of these two justices ignores such guarantees on. the assumption that the neces. sities of the government are paramount. In both the Texas and Culifornia cases involving the title to Tidelands, the Court upheld teig aoitrine without defining what are the necessities of the Zovernmenrt, The language of these justices uging auch phrases as, “bare lezal title", or, "K2re property ownership" indicates their juridical siilosophy. The exact larguage of Justice Douglas is, “Property rights must then be so subordinated to political rights as in sub- stance to coalesce and unite in the national sovereign....." The conception of property rights in our country has always been based on their existence by right of law and not by the Fiat of the particular which happens to be in power. If this were not true, then succeeding administrations could by Fiat change the titles to property held by their political opponents. This is the method in vogue in Totalita- ‘ian countries to deprive people of their property. Our economy, our social life, is organized on "legal titles". Persons have title to their home other things needed in everyday life. This legal title is the sole right to this ownership without fear of dispossession by government Fiat. In the absolute State countries, “legal title” exists only in the government, and in these lands, the government divests the jn the stdte. This is Marxian philosophy practised in Communist lands. ‘Fence: when a justice of the Supreme Court describes “legal title” by using such an adjective as “bare he is propounding a @dngerous doctrine which upholds a cardinal tenet of Marxian Socialism and which is a principal dogan of Communism. These idea expressed by such wide sweeping language of the justices, transcend all other considerations in the Tidelands cases, for here we bave an desue which penetrates to the very foundation of Gur Awerican philosc- phy of law and life as we know it, and attacks the fundamental rights So expressly guaranteed to us by the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States, and which are described a& -15- ;