Brenham weekly banner. [volume] (Brenham, Tex.) 1877-1907, 1884-01-03
RHERE IS TIE pIFF1cuLTn

WHERE rs THE DIFFICULTY
1t Is not the province of tbe BAN
MIR to defend Governor Ireland,
who is amply abloatd defsAd him
self, but it does certainly seem
strange thatpapers as ablymanagcd
and edited as the Galveston News
should be making war on him and
intimating IN unmistaKabIc terms
that he is personally responsible
for the recent terrible lynchiNg at
and for the fence-cutting
that has been going on Proiniscu-
ously all-oyer the state. The trou-
bles about wire,fence cutting have
been coming on very gradually
ever since the stock raising bust
ness has tended toward a giant
monopoly, The governor is GER
tainly the chief executive of the
state and it is his duty to see that
the laws are fairly and impartially
executed this. power is however
to a certain extent limited; the
governor cannot personally super
wise the action of the courts, the
,sheriffs and the constables, all of
whose duties are very plainly pre-
scribed by law. When the civil
authorities report to the governor
that they are unable to enfore the
law in certain county or locality
by reason. of being overPOwered
by a mob and call upon the Cover
nor for assistance, ii becomes his
duty to send the nearest and most
rconveniet militia company to the
assistance of the civil officers.
Fence-cutting has been going on
by wholesale for considerable
time, and Notwithstanding the fact
that that the district Judges have,
in the plainest and most, explicit
terms, charged their respective
grand juries 10 indict all yiolators
of the law, the grand iuries have
done nothing of the, kind. Is 1t
the duty of the governor to go
round and personally talk to every
recalcitrant grand juror and with
whip and spur make him do his
duty. Such proceedinglis in the
very nature of the case an inPossi-
bility, then why blame the COVER
nor for something that is entirely
beyond his personal CONTROL There
is iustice and reason IN all things,
and there is certainly neither JUS
tice or reason in blaming the gov
ernor for something that is beyond
his control. The people of the
sections of country whore lawless-
ness prevails are themselves re-
sponsible for it; they should insist
lupon the civil officers doing their
full duty. If grand jnries fail to
indict and the courts to try and
lcoyict offenders the governor is by
no means to blame, but that such
a condition of affairs should exist
is certainly 5tonbe deplored,r All
governments derive. their power
from the people, and in the present
exigency it is with the people
themselves to have the law enfore-
ed. If a law is unpopular and
lacks the moral support of peo'
pie or. a community, it is impossi'
to enforce it. No better illustra,
ton is needed than the impoteney
of the Sunday law, the local option
laws and the statutes against gamb
ling, and in this connection il
might be asked why not hold the
governor to a strict ri Ct accountability
for the almost total failure ct thu
special laws mentioned above
Those who insist upon the infalla.
bility of the governor and blame
him for not doiugywhat is entirely
out of his power would have mar
tial irw declared and put the state
in the hands Of a dictator, or pro.
vost marshal, whose word or will
would be supreme. 1t has long
been an open question whether OF
not the people are capable of self
government, and it isyet an unset
tied question, but itisaone that the
press and politicians shrink from
/ discussing. sn Hl.1l.yzila T,l 2fr'
u Is .H.