The weekly Thibodaux sentinel and journal of the 8th Senatorial District. [volume] (Thibodaux, Lna. [i.e. La.]) 1875-1898, 1896-10-24
TAT T1Ch UPON THE 81
PREME COURT.

immediately following the adoption
OF the Chicago platform. republican
organs and speakers grew wild over
the alleged attack in that platform
upon the Supreme Court OF the United
States and at one hnckied on their
rmor and rushed to the defense Of
that august body. Soon, however, the
democratic organs and orators an
sWertd their charge and routed them
completely. They showed that they
had made no attack upon the Supreme
Court half SO fierce as the onslaught
made by the republicans over the
bred Scott decision, and the Judges of
the court itself who delivered the opin
ions dissenting from that Of tie major
lty. This center shot from the demo
cratic guns silenced the republicans
and for a while we heard no more of
that attack upon the Supreme Court.
Recently the twaddle has been re-
newed in this congressional district
and the same old charges arc revamp-
ed by verdant stump sneakers Let
us examine iuto that alleged attack
and see what it amounts to.
We will analyze the plank in the
platform referring to the Suprege
Court, sentence by sentence, and dem
Onstrate from such analysis that our
republican friepds are engaged il the
prohtless business of setting A man 81
straw to knock it down, and hope by
that old 10 frighten timid
souls into voting against Bryan.
m first sentence reads
Until the money question is set
tied we are opposed to any agitation
for further changes in our tariff laws.
except such as are necessary to meet
the deficit caused by the adverse de-
cision OF the Supreme Court on the in-
come tax"
There is certainly no attack upon
the supreme cuGrt here. We have a
plain statement of the fact that the
deficit in our revenue is caused hy the
adverse decision on the income tax
which formed a part Of the revenue
measure. He whu can discern an at
Jack upon the court in a statement of
TACT universally conceded. is wonder
fully glftet with an Imagination with
out limit.
We proceed "But for this decision
by the supreme court there would he
no deficit in the revenue under the
law passed by a Democratic
III strict pursuance of the uniform de-
cislons VT that court for nearly leo
years, that court having in that decis-
ION sustained constitutional objections
70 lis enactment which had previously
overruled by tho ablest Judges
had ever sat on that bench.n
Other statements of fact, to-wit
that the decision caused the deficit in
the revenue; that the law declared
unconstitutional by the supreme court
had been passed by congress IN strict
with the uniform decisions
OF that court during 100 years next
preceding its passage ; that the same
objections urged against the law aud
sustained by tho court had been prc-
viously considered and overruled by
the ablest judges who had ever sat On
bench. There is no attack upon
the integrity of the court here il
hardly rises to the dignity of a crit
cism.
And here is the last sentence "We
declare that it is the duty of Congress
use all the constitutional power
remains after that decision. or |
which may come from its reversal by
the coart as it may hereafter be con- |
stituted, SO that the burdens of taxa
non NAV De equally aud impartially
ald TO the end that we may all bear
our proportion of the expenses Of the
This, we opine, is the paragraph
which contains the awful threat against
supreme court, aud that thu is
supposed to be concealed in the <