Frostburg mining journal. [volume] (Frostburg, Md.) 1871-1913, 1895-06-22
The Difference.

opinion of the Court of Appeals, es-
tablishing upon the ruins of the school
law the corpus of an oligarehy, the
Homecoming Recieao says:
As the JOURNAL has displayed the egotism
to term the State Board decision fraud, it is
not improbable that it will have the eflront-
cry to apply the same word to the law as laid
down by the highest tribunal in the State.
With Abraham Lincoln, the JOUR-
NAL believes that nothing is settled
that is not settled right"
Hence, taking the text of the orig
inal law, to say nothing of it's spirit and
undoubted intent, the opinion in the
case cited is nothing more nor less
than a shuttle of responsibility from
the court to wholly irresponsible
school board.
But the object of this observation is
to test the ReoieaO's faith in judicial
infallibility and loyalty to bench
DEGREES.
For instance, on Tuesday
The Supreme Court of Missouri handed
down an opinion declaring unconstitutional
the law which forbids the discharge of en-
ployees of corporations for refusal to sever
their connection with labor organizations.
The court holds that the law is a species of
class legislation which discrminates against
the non-union employee. The law was
enacted two years ago and provides penalties
of fine and imprisonment.
The question now is-whether the
Recieao has the "effrontery" to inform
its so-called labor constituents that the
Missouri court did exactly right IN so
decidedly sustaining the blackleg9
The JOURNAL will not say anything
about the Recieao's "egotism," but it
does want to know whether the Mis-
souri, decision is or is not fraud?
Again-if the JOURNAL be not mis-
taken the Recie,o some time ago SYM
pathized with one E. V. Debs in his
troubles with a court that held that he
could be imprisoned for contempt-an
issue which has raised the vital ques.
tion-whether this country is to be
governed by injunction9
While believing that Debs should
be punished severely, the JOURNAL
fears that he was jailed by the United
States Supreme Court on pretext of
less magnitude than his real offense,
and by a process which violates every
mans constitutional right to trial by
jury Of his peers.
But what the JOURNAL believes is
not in issue. The real question is
does the Recieao, in the face of it's So
called labor clientele, hold that because
a court Furnishes Debs, although in an
unusual way, the court is right, and,
therefore, the punishment is deserved
Will tell its 'largest circulation" that
labor leadership is crime
The JOURNAL would like to know
which side the Recieao is on in the case
entitled United States us. Debs, es-
pecially as we know how it stands in
the case entitled State of Maryland gs.
The Children of the Public Schools.
The true difference between the Re
vieao and the JOURNAL is about this
assuming that the Recieso is whatever
the JOURNAL is not-the Reciep stands
by the State court in unloading its
privileges and the United States court
in acquiring new prerogatives.
In clearer terms, the Regie,o is for
one judicial course in education, and
probably enjoys the "egotism" of
favoring another judicial course in So
called labor.
The JOURNAL has the "effrontery" to
stand up for TIE constitutional rights
of both-the right of every child to
common school English education, and
of every offender to trial by jury.
The sacred fund of the one should never
be robbed for dedication to any other
purpose whatever, and the sovereign
privilege of the other should never be
set aside under any pretext.