The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1891-06-15

resi- But OF course, he may succeed IN
proving his good faith and the absence of
any intent to commit the crime. This we
will eoncede. Though why he should be put
to this Inconvenience by the Postoffice De-
partment we cannot imagine. But how
about the edition of his paper in which the
unfortunate advertisement appeared? 1t
will not be delivered. It may contain news
OF the greatest Importance to its subscribers,
the sentiments of the greatest thinkers and
moralists of the day, but because OF this one
advertisement, the true character Of which
the publishers Of the paper could not pos
Sibly be expected to know any more than
the puplic it was designed to deceive, it is
excluded from the mails.
However, If one class of advertisement Is
TO be excluded why not any other? Could
not, Indeed, will not the law be extended to
take in medical advertisements, those of
wine and liquor hous es-if fact, all adver-
tisementS Of any character except those of
church or lodge meetings. 1t is easy to see
that the tendency Of such legislation is to
seriously abridge the liberty of the press, be-
sides deprivlng il of its legitimate revenues
without due process OF law.
The mail service, we repeat, is the ex-
elusive franchise of the General Govern
ment, and yet it is TO be administered under
these restrictions and conditions. What then
becomes of the liberty of the press? Evil
IDENTIFY the men who framed this bill. thought
llttlC, VI CdItu less, uUVuL Tile IU6Tly Vi Il
press In the habit Of crlticiSing their acts.
But the public have an interest in the press,
and newspaper men have right to carry on
their business without interference, except
by the due process of law. The Consttu-
ton expressly declares not only thattbis lib
erty shall not be destroyed, but also that it
Shall not be abridged.
And why is the liberty of the press
abridged? Simply to suppress a lottery
company incorporated under the laws of
the State of Louisiana. These laws have
never been declared unconstitutional. The
right Of the State Of Louisiana to authorize
or maintain lottery company has never
been questioned. The Supreme Court Of
the State has in fact declared that the queS-
ton Of the extension OF the company's char
ter is properly before the people, and no one
doubts but that this extension will be ratl-
fed by as large vote as cast at the last
election for that purpose. The State of
Louisiana, its charities and its works of
Improvement receive large sums yearly
from the revenue of the lottery, and it is
absurd to say in this land of ratf1es and
church fairs that the State of Louisiana has
no moral right to maintain lottery. Any
number of Governments and States have
approved OF lotteries, whether conducted
for private gain or for the public benefit. 1t
Is rather late in the day to import such new
distinctions into practical business of carry
ing on a Government.
Besides who can tell where this proSelyt-
ism through the POstoffice will stop? Shall
Maine impose her prohibition laws upon
wine-grOVing California? Shall the Sun
day laws of Connecticut be saddled upon
those States whose history, the very char
acter of their population, leads them to re-
gard Sunday as day to be differently OBJ
served? All these questions are matters of
opinion. often of theological opinion, ques-
tions which are at least open to debate, and
yet it might be sought through the Post
Office Department to make them the rule
for all.
Nothing could be more monstrous nor in
the light of history, so absurd. In 1886 q
law similar to the present one was intro
duced in Congress fOrblddng the delivery
of SeditiOus documents relative to slavery.
Senator, afterward President Buchanan
supported the law; Daniel Webster opposed
it. But what were these Sedlti0us dOcu-
ments? They were the criticisms of the
AbOlltiOniSts upon slavery as IL then existed
in the Southern States. The bill proposed
to muZze these expressions of public opinion
and was undoubtedly blow at the liberty Of
the press. 1t failed Of enactment. Does any
one doubt if the same measure had come up
later say in 1862, that what would have been
considered "seditious documents would
be reflections upon the right of the North to
deprive the South of their property in slaves
without their consent and without compen-
satiOn. Few now question that the abOli-
ton of slavery has been a blessing to this
country, and was dictated by the best Senti-
mentS Of humanity. But how was this SEN
tment aroused but through the press? And
how was it proposed to nullify this senti-
ment but by just such means as are now in-
vOked to enforce the opinions of dominant
party, which, even if they do not vary with
regard to this matter. are certain to do so
with regard to great many questions which
fol witt l., hn rIlln ie hi
however, that the Supreme Court Of the
United States can uphold such a statute,
however much 1t may care to do so. Such a
decision would not only be contrary to all
its presidents and contrary to the organic
law of the land, but, were it lived up to,
would make life in the republic well nigh in
tolerable. Indeed, legislation such as be-
trays itself in this statute saps the very
foundation of liberty in substituting Tor the
despotiSm of the absolute monarch the op-
preston and tyranny of partisan power, in
trenched behind the irresponsible authority
Of its Ulcers.
During the Mexican War communication
between the troops under General Scott and
the Government at Washington was very
imperfect. Months on mOnths elapsed be-
fore dispatches and reports could be trans
mitted to and from the seat of war.
1t so happened that although the then
dominant party who opposed General Scott
euOCeouou III seCuiihS MS loHOEdl IiOln Tue
command of the army, the order to that
effect did not reach him until after the City
of Mexico had capitulated.
1t is needless to state that the hero of this
brilliant campaign was Immediately rein
stated and as little as possible said about
the injustice done him, General Scott made,
however, one remark:
THE long arm of power" he said, "has
taken me away from the head of my
troops"
The epithet as applied to the General
Government is certainly expressive. "The
long arm of power" is not always accom-
panied with vision, foresight or self-control
1t sometimes ignores local needs and differ
ences, and in its Impotence to act oYerridrs
liberty and justice.-San Francisco Ex-
amiuer.