You are not currently logged in.
Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
"Judging Is also Administration": An Appreciation of Constructive Leadership
Harold H. Burton
American Bar Association Journal
Vol. 33, No. 11 (November 1947), pp. 1099-1102, 1164-1167
Published by: American Bar Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25716190
Page Count: 8
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
Returning to his home city which he served capably as Mayor and which helped to elect him to the Senate of the United States, Associate Justice Harold H. Burton was an honored figure at our Annual Meeting, as Cleveland's first citizen and a member of our Association since 1924. Before the Section of Judicial Administration, "the junior member" of what he had described as "the most junior Court we have had since the Court was ten years old" (33 A.B.A.J. 648; July, 1947) took his text from Chief Justice Taft's observation that "judging is also administration" and gave "an appreciation of constructive leadership in the judicial administration of the Courts of the United States." His documented narration and his just tribute were to specific accomplishments under the leadership of Chief Justices William Howard Taft, Charles Evans Hughes and Harlan Fiske Stone. With respect to some of these constructive steps in improving the mechanics of judicial administration, Mr. Justice Burton gave credit to our Association's advocacy, and his documentation contains many references to our Association's Reports as well as to the Journal, where the record of many of these projects was made at the time, in connection with Association action. Singularly, he did not refer to our Association's very active part, and its long fight, for the creation of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts. (See 63 A.B.A. Rep.  184, 188, 261, 342, 749, 962; 24 A.B.A.J.  184, 188 [March]; 261, 342 [April]; 749 [September]; 962, 979 [December]; 64 A.B.A. Rep.  517; 25 A.B.A.J.  90-92 [February]; 451 [June]; 1006 [December]). He neither mentions nor refers to our Association's part in the enactment of the salutary bill to enable the retirement of justices of the Supreme Court (Public Law No. 10, 75th Congress, 1st Session, Chapter 21; 50 Stat. 24; 28 USC § 375 (a)) concerning which there are unpublished and unwritten chapters as to our Association's role. (See, moreover, 22 A.B.A.J. 741; October, 1936). Mr. Justice Burton was doubtless aware, as he assembled and wrote his valuable narrative concerning the Court and the service of three great Chief Justices, that he wrote chiefly concerning facilities and agencies that tend to improve the efficiency and so the substance of justice, and that he dwelt little on the Court's concept of laws and the Constitution and the Court's impacts on our constitutional republic. He discussed the statutory enlargement of the discretionary, and the restriction of the obligatory, jurisdiction of the Court; but he did not refer to the disposition of the Court to "defer" to the decisions of administrative agencies as to what statutes mean and what the law and policy of a subject should be and is, nor did he include the Administrative Procedure Act as proffering a further forward step, if the Court would but adopt and follow the expressed intent of its legislative authors as to judicial review and so give full force and effect to the standards set by the Act as to what should be reviewable. As to these and other aspects, Dean Roscoe Pound's trenchant analysis of recent trends, published elsewhere in this issue, will be found significant. Meanwhile Mr. Justice Burton is performing what is indubitably a service to the Court and the federal judicial system, through such expositions as we published in our July issue (page 645) and as we give here.
American Bar Association Journal © 1947 American Bar Association