Southern standard. (McMinnville, Tenn.) 1879-current, 1886-07-17
COL. J. H. BURNHAM AND THE
. sss--.a-. NEW ERA.

gentleman and Installing arguments.
The STANDARD is not theadvocate of
either candidate for Chancellor, but
will express its opinion of the man.
ner in which they conduct their can
vass as freely as upon any other pub
lie question.
We have said nothing, nor has Mr..
Burnam himself as far as we know,
about his personal fitness for the Office
to which he aspires. We only criti-
cized his policy as candidate for jul
dicial preferment. All the people
wish to know in this election is,
whether the candidate is honest and
learned in that branch of the law
which it will be his duty to admins
ter? The candidates modesty and
interest should preclude him as a wit
ness on this question, either for him
self or against his opponent. A pub
lie discussion and controversy by the
candidates about themselves and each
other, will necessarily engender UNI
pleasant feelings among the candi
dates and their friends that will fol-
low the successful aspirant into his
Office.
Let the people judge each of these
candidates fairly by his character at
home for honesty and ability; and
this they can only get through pri-
vate channels, because.people will not
publicly speak evil of their neigh
bors. For these reasons, we opposed
the public speaking of candidates for
Chancellor. But as Mr.. Burnham
has adopted this method he should
make it effective. Would it prove
that he was fit to be Chancellor, if he
could prove that his opponents were
not? yet this was his only effort. He
condemns his opponents absolutely,
and while admitting their undoubted
integrlty-one because he has riden
upon free pass, the other because he
has been railroad attorney. Why
charge them both with a wrong in
connection with the railroads, when
it is a well know fact that railroads
have little, if any, litigation in our
Chancery courts? This coincidence
of coupling the name of each of these
gentlemen with the railroads, could
not be of purpose to excite against
them the prejudice that rightly exists
against the railroadsalone. Such un-
fairness would be incompatible with
the elevated character that a Chan,
cellor should have. 1t must be then
that these are the gravest errors that
can be found in the lives of these two
men.
BWe'condemn the custom of using
free passes, but like many other Gus
toms of eviltendency, it is unthought
edly INDUCED in by some of oul
purest and best men. Such accom-
modations are most readily accepted
by those who have the least suspicion
ola wrong motive prompting the
gift. If necessary we could give the
names of judges using free passes
whom this people wouldknow, never
suspected Ethey were committing {
wrong.
They have never givena biased judg
ment for the railroads andnever will
Their only sin consists in having fol
lowed a custom, that the people nov
condemn. The wrong of Judge Han
cock is nothing more.
If the fact. that Mr.. Bearden ha
been employed by. the railroads, dis
qualities him as Chancellor in Nh
Burnham's opinion, he can claim n
advantage over Mr.. Bearden, unles
he means for us to understand tina
he has never had any clients in thi
Chancery division where he has S
long resided. There is no distinctio
between one client and another i
their subsequent effects upon Char
cellor, except that railroad ellen
will be less apt to be before him tina
any other kind.
The truth is that when Mr.. Burr
ham admits the integrity of his oppc
, nents, the only legitimate inquiry RI
, naming open, is their legal acquire
ments. With these views upon tn
3 subject, the STANDARD failed to sc
the force or necessity of Mr.. Burr
hams arguments. If Judge Han
e cock has everused free railroad passe
!, he is no more to blame than all otht
!. State officials who have done S,
y and we do not.believe they havebee
# corrupt. MThe custom Of giving thes
l. free passes to State officials originate
IS before the railroads wers suspected
L. Il