◆ SpookStack

I , 0 J "4.-I . 13 . the Court should consider questions of policy. He did not say that the Court should consider questions or policy in all cases. Now it happens that the case of Mara v. Madison was tried without a Jury; and, therefore, naturally, the Court was allowed a much wider latitude than it would have been if this had been a jury case. . The genius of the Constitution is that it does not provide for a final arbiter; it does provide for checks and balances which may be used by the different branches of the Government, one against the other, to guard against or to repel encroachments. It is this very system of uneasy balances which gives the citizen his best guarantee that his rights will continue to be observed. For oce all power is put in a single place, so surely as "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" the individual rights of citizens are doomed from that day on. at the top or page 3 or his report, the Attorney General says: "This type of legislation threatens the independence of the Judiciary." That statement simply is not so. This bill does not threaten the independence of the Judiciary, and it does not threaten our system of checks and balances. What it does threaten is the imbalance which has been created by decisions of the Supreme Court in recent years. It threatens the power to legislate which the Supreme Court has arrogated to itself during those years. It threatens the status quo, the situation which favors the growth of big central government and the decline and decay of States'.Rights. There are a great many people in this country today who favor that status quo, tho want to see it preserved, and we must now assume the