Rock Island daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1886-1893, 1892-06-29
The SUNDAY BALL QUESTION
As In all Things There are Two sides
tOit.

There are two sides to all questions.
AT least as rule. there are until one is
established as right by a rule of law.
Ihere are two sides to the Sunday ball
question. The fact that the subject has
reached that crisis where the law has in
terfered, and where the law must deter
mine who is right in the sight OF the law,
demonstrates this fact. In Rock Island
there is wide difference of opinion as to
whether the mayors Interpretation OF the
law is correct, and there is a much more
varying sentiment as to whether the posi-,
ton of Chief Miller is we'll taken in as
Stunning the role Of prosecuting witness
under the state law as means of enforcing
provision Of the municipal code. But it
is not the purpose of THE ARGUS to discus
the law as it pertains to Sunday ball
playing. The question of the laws APP
plicatit has reached that point where it
promises to be settled properly, and when
1t is determined, there is no reason to
doubt the decision will stand which ever
way itis. 1t is not the desire of THE ARGUS
to sustain any form of Sabbath desecra-
ton. Personal opinion, however,
whether 1t be for or against Sunday bali
playing does not determine whether it is
a violation OF the proper observance Of
Sunday as the law views it. Courts are for
determining the application of the law.
No one charged with violation of law is
guilty until he is proven SO. Once proven
guilty he should be punished. If his in
nocence is established by due process of
law, he is entitled to the benefit of it. We
can't all be judges as to how far the law
of regu' alton of Sunday observances
should be applied, and how far it should
be withheld. If we could, great deal
of injustice would be done.
"Some men are more fortunate than
Others" said citizen discussing
the matter. The man of wealth
and sffuence whose time is his
own, sees no wrong in driving out Sun
day afternoon in his fine equipsge and en-
joYing himself as he sees fit. That is no.
body's bushes but his own, any more than
it is II he keeps man busy Sunday pre-
parlng his eQuipsge for his use as long as
he pays the man for his work. The man
who is fortunate enough to own bicycle
may ENJOY it IS he plesses. That is no.
body's business so loag as he disturbes
nobody else. Yet these same men may
cons.rue the law that it gives them
the right TO interfere with the amuse-
ment Of a congregation OF men who
are not able to own carriages and
bicycles, and whose time is not always
their own, notwithstanding that the
amusement they enjoy does not disturb
the man who owns and enjoys the car
rage, and the man who owns and enjoys
the bicycle. Now don't believe that
Sunday ball playing should be allowed TO
continue if 1t is proven disturbance, hut
the individual who is disturbed should
enter the complaint and become the pros
ecuting witness. / believe in the en-
forcement of all laws, and if it be unjust
in its discrimination, we can't help that,
but hold that the man who is without
sin should cast the frat stone. If the law
permits the man who has advantages for
ENJOYING himself on Sunday to
have privileges over the man
who has not, that man should not be so
inconsiderate of his fellow men as to
bring to bear on them q law which ex-
cludes him from its violation in form of
which is to his liking, and
which good fortune has placed at his dis
possl"
Il am not upholdnq Sunday ball plays
ing mind you. for 1 don't attend Sunday
games, and if they are proven q distur-
bance Of the peace on the Sabbath they
ought to be stopped. but it i the law
alone that can stop the disturbance, on
the testimony of those who are disturbed