Shepherdstown register. [volume] (Shepherdstown, Va. [W. Va.]) 1849-1955, 1899-09-14
Written for the Register.)
Moral VS.. Legal Right.
BY j. A. TROSTLE.

liens. No one desires to be accounted
less. Even the prisoner behind the bars
or the culprit arraigned before the court
is not usually so hardened in crime as
to be Indifferent to the fact that he has
transgressed law. a certain amount of
shame attaches itself TO all, except a
small number of the most hardened,
who are conscious of having failed in
coming up to the requirements OF the
codes which stand TO them as an express
sion of the will, if not of the moral SEN
timent, OF the powers that be. But the
subject of legal right has several as
poets. 1t is only our object here to dis
cuss the question as to whether the high
est citizenship is derived from such a
strict obedience to the national state
and local laws, or in short civil law, as
will be satisfied with doing only what
the law requires on the one hand or re-
framing simply from what it forbdS on
the other; or whether one may do Ger
tain thing which the law permits, and
perhaps makes some sort OF special pro
vision for, where another course is open
which may not be so desirable from a
point of view of personal interest, but
all right thinking people.
In other words, is not moral right SUI
perior TO legal right ? The question is
so self-evident that it is all but useless
tomutiply words upon it, But frequent
notorious cases of its violation urge us
to further consideration.
Simply because some technically OF
the law gives me legal right to take ad,
vantage of my neigh Dor, have the RIGHT
to take that advantage If he has come
into the possession of certain property
or rights through any just process, have
the RIGHT (moral right to deprive him
of those possessions of rights and APP
propriate them TO my use or that OF any
one else on the ground that certain
minor point in law has not been OBJ
served ? Or have | the RIGHT TO discard
the wishes or interests of the masses Tor
personal gain, though it be in accord
anCe with law
These are plain questions. We meet
with them every day. They arise al
most unconSCiOuSly IN a large per cent
of our daily transactions. 1t IS SO often
the case that large corporations, certain
classes and parties and individuals as
well. keep lust within the bounds of the
law and vet indulge i'm not only un-ChrIs-
tian but even inhuman practices. Ihey
grind down the poor uniortunateS VINO
happen to have fallen before the ruin
less iuggernant wheels Of their heath
enish power They take advantage here
and there of those who have not the nee
essarv protection of the law, and that
simply because they are deprived Of
their lust share in the making of those
laws Corporations, capitalists and 9th
er influential individuals exercise such
controlling influence in the framing
of those laws that they can easily leave
a loop-hole through which they can es-
cape condemnation for doing exactly
what the law appears to forbid. Laws
are often so framed as to admit Of two,
or as far as we know, of an infinite
number CT interpretations. Again some
laws are recent and but slightly un-
derstood. No one dare claim that
any civil code drawn up by any mere
man or set of men is perfect.
Laws are, or should be, intended for
the good of the greater number. We
speak Of general laws and not special
enactments for the protection OF special
interests. 1t is customary, at least where
certain number of persons are con-
cerned, for the will Of the majority 10
rule. Justice demands this, and the de-
mand of Justice is nothing more than
an expression of moral right
We know that our courts which eX-
ecute the law have no right to legislate,
but nevertheless we think they should
exercise more wisdom than the mere
letter of the law gives them in render
ing their decision though in cases
where the law is openly broken they
should not finch from giving justice
because Of policy Of any nature by evad-
ing the spirit in obeying and UNFOLDING
the letter of the law.
Individual citizens place a very low
value on their own moral characters,
whether acting in their individual Ca
pacity or as the agents or members of a
corporation, when they test the right
ness of their actions by the weakness of
the law. The man who is honest only
so far as law makes him honest will in
his dishonesty evade the law if possible
and is not 10 be trusted out of the reach
of an officer Of the law.
Moral obligation stands where there
is no law. And whatever the law the
principle of justice remains the same.
For the moral law is like
Truth. crushed to earth shall rise again,
The eternal years OF God are hers.
Every man is by duty bound to pro-
teCt his own interests and seek his own
profit. Some might desire to add by all
lawful methods to this last sentence.
Here the question arises, | may be going
to my work some morning to earn my
daily bread BY the wayside | see a
a poor wretch who is poor, sick, starry
ing and crippled. | know if | stop |
will be late getting to my work and Will
have to lose the day. No civil law com
mands me to stop and minister to the
poor mass of Indebtedness. He has no
legal claim on me. Yet if | did stop
and thereby save his life who would be
so Indifferent as not to give me credit
for il And why Because | did what
was my moral duty. | had legal right
to pass on as did the priest and levite in
the parable of the Good Samaritan. But
there was a moral right incumbent up
on me because of which stopped. The
sufferer had a moral claim on me and a
right higher than statute law could give
him TO expect me to stop.
Now in any other case why is it not
my duty to sacrifice my own interests
to those of others IN greater need The
law excuses many things which moral
ity forbids and condemns. So likewise
the law gives me many privileges which
it would be morally criminal for me to
take advantage Of.
Now of course we can not make an
authoritative or compelling demand on
men to obey this high principle of right
but it nevertheless remains true that
they will never become good citizens
till their sense of RIGHT is higher than
the demands of the law. Honesty de-
mands more of man than the laws can
force him TO do.
Finally, the civil law is undergoing
constant change. The moral law never
changes. So, then, right arising from
the moral law is infinitely higher than
right arising from the civil law