Hutchinson gazette. [volume] (Hutchinson, Kan.) 1895-1902, 1897-06-24

j
presidential campaign, bitterly de
nounced Mr.. Eryan and his platform
for his and its criticism of the supreme
court. The Post maintained that the
supreme court, being the court of last
resort in all affairs, ought to be free
from criticism. Buta change has come
over the spirit of the New York Posts
dreams The Post made bitter criti-
cism of the supreme courts decision re-
lating to the freight association. In
defense of that criticism the Post says:
Several newspapers for which we
have sincere respect have commented
on our criticism of the supreme courts
decision in the case of the transmits
souri, freight association, as though a
loyal newspaper were bound not mere
ly to obey but to approve of all deci
sions made by that tribunal This doc
trine is susceptible of very wide appli
cation. 1t would require us to approve
of the bred Scott decision. 1t would
require us to give our assent intellect
unlly to the contradictory decisions of
the court; as for example, to the deci
sion rendered by Chief Justice Chase
denying the constitutionality of the
legal tender act, and to the latter ones
affirming it. There have been, as we
are frequently reminded, two contra
dictory decisions on the constitutional
ity of the income tax Which of these
may patriotic citizen criticise? The
proper answer is that he may criticise
both. Mr., Lincoln laid down the cor
rect rule in his debates with Senator
Douglas, that we owe obedience to the
decisions of courts but do not neces-
sarily owe them our approval. A mo-
ments reflection will show them that
any other rule involves intellectual
slavery and the grossest self-contra
diction.
This is worthy of special attention
because it fairly illustrates the posi-
ton of the monopoly organs. They
assailed Bryan because he criticised
supreme court decision that he believ--
to be unjust and against the interests
of the people. Now that the court has
rendered ono decision that is not agree
able to the corporations the Post and
other monopoly organs denounce that
decision; and it is worthy of remark
that in justification of their right to
criticise they employ the same argu-
ment for the use of which they heaped
their scorn upon Mr.. Bryan less than
seven months ago World Herald.
| ---
Among those who give the subject
most careful thought the idea is gain
ing ground that no person holding
government Office should be permitted
to shape the policy of party. When
we place man in congress, or any
other position, he has duties there
which should occupy his attention.
He is Our hired man and there is no
reason why he should come home and
boss the job Of looking after household
affairs, The advantages furnished by
good salary and the incidentally ad-
ded power given By his position enables
him to become successful schemer in
planning 4 campaign and fixing
things for some special purpose. Even
the township trustee should not be a
boss in the township caucus The
county clerk or treasurer, or any other
county official can we'll afford to give
his time to his office, instead Of to the
packing of n county convention, or at
any rate the people can well afford to
insist that he shall The voters have
perfect right to ask that our conven
tions be made representative of the
people and not n mere conclave of Office
holders and office seekers. Chicago
Express.
1t is now regarded fixed certainty
that the antipooling decision of the
sherman antitrust law is to be evaded
None of the roads has yet been infu
enced by it, and one railroad man says
that there are several ways TO get
around the law. This shows how much
there is in the principle of government
control" rather than government own
crship. 1t will help TO show the peo-
pie that. in order to have control we
must have ownership. Nevertheless
there should be no blame attached to
the railroad managers for ignoring the
law If they can. On the basis of our
selected programme it's wrong. II the
railroads belong to the railroad com
panies, they ought to be managed by
those companies as the companies see
tit, without the Intervention of those
who do not own anything in them 1t
ought to be one thing or the other-in-
dividualism or socialism-for striving
to work out an economic problem with
combination of individualistic and
socialistic factors can never lead to