1964 Awake! - Theocratic Collector.com

er sentenced to two years' imprisonment.
The sentencing judge said that "the motive
for the corrupt effort to interfere With
justice was venality and greed," and that
Keogh's actions "cast a shadow upon the
administration of justice." -L.ess than a
year later, in February 1963, another New
York judge, Louis L. Friedman, was re·
moved from the bench because of "un·
ethical conduct."
Although God's Word instructs not to
"be partial in judgment," and to "hear the
little one the same as the great one," ra·
cial prejudices have caused many judges
Wlwisely to ignore this counsel. The color
of one's skin and his social status all too
often affect the judgment that is rendered.
Concerning this situation the New York
Time8 of June 6, 1964, editorialized: "In·
credible as it sounds, it took five years and
three Supreme Court decisions for the
[National Association for the Advancement
of Colored People] even to get a
hearing in Alabama. Once the Supreme
Court of Alabama simply refused to com·
ply with a Federal ruling; another time it
held the case for more than a year without
any action."
Many judges have also let sentiment or
prejudice make them not so wise when Jehovah's
witnesses have appeared before
them concerning their right to refuse blood
transfusions. Instead of "fearing God" by
respecting their Scripturally founded reasons
for abstaining from blood, judges
have granted court orders forcing blood
transfusions on Jehovah's witnesses. (Lev.
17:14; Acts 15:28, 29) For instance, in
September 1963, Judge J. Skelly Wright of
the United States Circuit Court of Appeals
at Washington, D.C., shoved aSIde the legal
guarantees of personal freedom and
ordered that blood be administered to Mrs.
Jessie Jones against her will. And just this
past June the New Jersey Supreme Court
4
forced Mrs. Willimina Anderson to receive
a blood transfusion.
In striking contrast to such unwise overruling
of one's religious convictions was
the course taken by Judge Bernard S. Meyer,
of the New York Supreme Court. When
Jacob Dilgard refused to accept blood on
religious grounds, the lawyer arguing
for compulsory blood transfusions said,
among other things: "The Penal Law says
that a person may not take his own
life, and it seems to me that Jacob Sr.
here is just about in the situation of taking
his own life by making his decision
not to accept the blood after the explanations
that were made to him regarding the
necessity for it."
However, Judge Meyer, who was not
swayed by this emotional appeal, ruled:
"I cannot agree that the final analog:y
which you draw is applicable, because
there is always the question of judgment
involved as to whether or not the medical
decision is correct ... There is no question,
I take it, in anybody's mind that this man
has been completely competent at all times
when being presented with the decision
that he had to make and in making the
decision that he did. That being so, I
would decline to make any further order
directing that blood be administered. In
other words, I would deny this petition."
There is no question that it is a difficult
thing for a judge to act wisely. Since there
is little control over his hours, his industriousness
or his thoroughness, he needs to
discipline himself to keep well informed
and to give his best. This includes main·
taining moral strength to withstand the
pressures exerted by dishonest men. He
must be 'trustworthy, hating unjust profit,'
but, at the same time, impartial and unprejudiced,
not allowing personal feelings
to affect his jUdgment. How apparent it is
that for a judge to be truly wise he must
make decisions in the fear of God!
AWAKE!