Frostburg mining journal. [volume] (Frostburg, Md.) 1871-1913, 1896-05-09
Darkness That Can be Felt.

Mr.. Richmond, it seems, has been
misunderstood, not to say misrepre.
scented.
But the JOURNAL brought from An
napoiis deep-seated impression that
he had pronounced the company store
bill constitutional, and every utterance
since made bad not served to remove
it until his own conclusive word, else
where printed, sets HIM right.
In expounding the fundamental dis
tinction which disallows a corporation
of individuals dong that which they
can do as individuals. he intimates
that his view ''pinches one of the
JOURNALS pet doctrines.
In this he is mistaken. The JOUR-
NAL has never gone an inch further
than this-that corporation is just
as free to conduct its business above
the inquisition and dictation of its
employees as an individual--a right
which in no sense deprives employees
of the equivalent privilege of going
and getting employment where in
their estimation the auspices are
brighter and the conditions better.
Mr.. Richmond believes the mining
bill is constitutional. That is, while
individuals only may indulge in mer-
camille as well AS industrial pursuits,
and while other individuals in a cor
porate capacity may not, it seems to
be unlawful for any individuals to con-
duct mining business only, unless
they incur interference, nominally by
the State, but really by their en-
ployees. We say mining business only,
for although "the law of the law" as
the constitution has been called, in
culcates not only uniformity but uni
versatility of application, this bill makes
a speciality of supervision by the State
through their employees of the bust
ness conduct of individuals, corporate
or not, engaged in mining.
To draw line here between lndivld
ual rights in the one case and corpo
rate rights in the other would be as fine
a job as vivisecting and separating the
soulless part of an individual from
that which is soulful. The operation
might not uncover the link between
mind and matter, but it would be-
nosing around i'll that neighborhood.
But Mr.. Richmond, after affirming
the bill as in harmony with the organic
law. says that he ''has understood that
it was vetoed on another ground-that
it was vicious, improper and unneces-
sary legislation"
And here he leaves us in the dark,
for he says-''on this | express no
opinion" Moreover. he "presumes he
has not sufficient information from
which to form an opinion"
This is unfortunate, for just now the
JOURNAL, for one, would love to know
whether under any circumstances a
"vlcious, improper, unnecessary BILL"
can be in accord with what Parsons
calls "that gentle expression of the de-
llber.te determination of all the
people"-the constitution.
For if it had been certainly known
by everybody that the bill is a good,
proper and needful measure, it is to
be questioned whether doubt of it's
constitutionality would not have been
regarded as almost profane.
But as it is we may never know.
With the testimony of Gov. Lowndes
on one side, that OF the walking dele
gate on the other, and Mr.. Richmond
unconsciously giving the latter the
benefit of all he confessedly doesn't
know, we may go to our graves with
out ever learning that we were entitled
by charter to live under the aureole
and oegis of a mine inspector, selected
for us from the unnaturalized millions
by the primaries of the Pine Hills, the
Elbow and Nigger mountain.