You say you found difficulty in securing impartial judges.
Well, I should think so.
The “impartial judge” is one of those pleasing fancies with which we amuse ourselves, for the reason that we can’t help it. We have got to get decisions some way or other, and we don’t quite like the idea of settling grave questions by spitting at a mark, or of guessing whether it is heads or tails in the tossing of a coin—therefore, we resort to “the impartial judge.”
It is one of the jokes of Christian civilization which nobody laughs at because we have agreed that it is not a joke.
Just between me and you, the “impartial judge” is brother to the “non-partisan editor,” and twin-brother to the “disinterested office-seeker.”
You say that it is generally wrong to criticize the conduct of those who make decisions.
You are mistaken about that. It is generally the proper thing to do. And it is often the only thing you can do. True, it is not as much satisfaction as we are entitled to, but it’s something.
What would baseball be, if we couldn’t cuss the umpire?