Clearfield Republican. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1851-1937, 1879-11-12
WHAr WE PROPOSE TO DO.

deliberate and persistent effort to dis
tort and pervert, instead Of striving TO
amend the Constitution. There IS no
ground for a doubt, no excuse for the
shadow of u doubt, that as the Consti-
tuition stands and as we feel sure il
will stanj-it is tho duty of the State
to protect its citizens in their rights
and to punish violations Of State laws.
This is satisfactory TO the Democratic
party, and we believe it is not less
satisfactory to the Radical masses.
But it is opposed by many of the lead
ing statesmen, politicians and organs
of that party, the legitimate successors
ofthe Federalists. Their constant aim
is to centralize in the General Govern
ment the powers, duties and rights be.
longing to the States, according to the
fundamental law.
Now, if they would go at their work
in fair and manly way, by conceding
that the Constitution is against them,
and agitating for its amendment, they
would deserve respect. We do not
think their agitation would be effectual
in the direction intended, for so strong
is our belief in the popular attachment
to local selfgovernment that we feel
assured the people will never consent
to It's surrender, and then a general
discussion of the question, on a pro.
position to adopt centra..@.ug amend
ment would be fatal to the party ad-
vocating such change. But party
that has the courage Of its convictions is
always respected, and when the Radi-
cal centralizationists will stop trying
to destroy, and begin an effort to
amend the organic law, they will be
entitled to degree of consideration
that they do not now deserve.
But the supposition that the local
authorities of any State "will not pro.
tect citizens in the enjoyment OF their
rights" etc, is not just, and does not
accord with the facts. While the
rights of persons and property are of.
ten violated in every country on earlh
since Cain killed Abel, and while Grim
inals often escape punishment through
defective laws or bad administration
III every pait Of the Union, and in all
other countries, it is not true that
there is any section, State, or oven
country, in this Republic where crimes
meet with public approval, and where
the failure to punish criminals is inten.
tional. The citizens of every locality
have much greater interest in the
enforcement Of laws and the preserva-
tion Of order in their midst than any
body else can have. Their personal
safety, their peace OF mind, the safety
and value of their property, and every.
thing OF value in life, are dependent; on
the maintenance OF fair degree of
domestic tranquility.
Capital avoids every place where
disorder reigns. Property of every
description, except, perhaps, arms and
ammunition, depreciates rapidly whore
the criminal classes are not sternly and
effectually repressed. Taxes increase,
a sense Of insecurity makes life worth.
less, and the contempt of good citizens
in other localities adds to the discom-
fort Of all order. loving people who per-
nit their vicious neighbors to get, for
atime, on top. Thisstate ofthings brings
its own remedy. The inducements to
order and regularity are irresistible.
Outraged Justice vindicates ITSELF
Crime is put down by strong and
sometimes rough hand, and The base
elements Of society are forced into
proper subordination. Such has been
the rule in times past, and such will bc
the course Of events in the future, for
ii Is the result Of natural laws.
The transfer of the guardianship Of
personal rights TO tho authority could
be Of no avail, even If 1t could be law
fully and peacefully accomplished. In
this country public opinion rules. Our
statute books are crowded with laws
that no one tries to enforce, because
they are opposed by public sentiment.
Jurics are swayed by this power, Us
has been demonstrated in every State.
Verdicts in opposition to law and evi.
dence are the rule, where attempts are
made to secure conviction against Q
strong current of public feeling. A
jury in Federal court would just be
as likely to be thus controlled as a jury
in State court. Shall we abandon
trial by jury, and set up military trib-
unals or the one man power Or shall
we depend, in the future, as we have
in the past, on the people to protect
their own lives, property, liberty, good
name, peace and comfort, by making
good local laws and doing their best to
insure their impartial enforcement p
Washington Post.
~