Daily inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1881-1901, 1900-02-23
ARGUMENT Of rye az"

= MD
- 80 =
After having called down. upon it's head
the censure and contempt of every good
citizen in the state, for dragging the SUI
preme court of Montana away from the
duties Of the bench, and trying to be-
smirch it with a uniform of it's own dirty
linen. the Anaconda Standard cannot rise
above the bitter disappointment which it
feels over the failure OF the effects anti
cipated from it's play.
1t writhes and squirms and wiggles,
Ike a juicy pine splinter in a hot stove,
over the public Interpretation whiSh 1t
has invoked; and perspires like an over
worked coolie, when 1t reflects upon the
far-reaching possibilities of The course it
has pursued. s-,
Unable to find solace or comfort in the
outcome Of its misadventure with the su-
preme court, and recognizing it's inability
to convert the existing situation into a
tonic for it's fluttering nerves, Vt falls
back upon irrelevant g~uesswprk. Suppo-
STORY conclusions of fact. hypothesis Of
doubtful vintage. and the mouldy Knight
have been" of a broken down political
! Maud Muller. This morning the Stands
ard says s@
If Treacey had denied making any Of
fers at all. nothing is more certain than
that the Inter Mountain would have ac-
ceDted his statement in preference to that
OF Judge Hunt. because the interests Of
Mr.. Clark would imperatively demand it.
When one gets seriously down to the
work Of doing business in the world Of
'ifs" there is practically no premise
which cannot be conjured up and no con-
clusion that cannot be drawn.
1t is only a question as to the strength
and vividness of the Imagination. and the
rapidity with which the wheels in a mans
head may work.
which the Standard invariably falls back
upon. when it is in the fix of the back
woods family that was out OF meat when
! the preacher was coming to dinner.
Telling the public what the Inter Noun
tain would have done, had somebody tes-
tilted otherwise than he did. may be COM
forting to our distressed contemporary,
and afford it as substantial grounds for
argument as it is able to find. but intelli-
gent readers will prefer a more whole-
some method Of dealing with matters Of
interest to the people. 1a3t "a
INDUCING the argument Of the ".'ff," in
order to meet the Standard on the only
ground where it seems perfectly at home
and able to maintain itself. we will say
that "if" Treacey had denied the state.
L.ments of Judge Hunt. which he didn't. and
had raised a question of veracity Between
himself and the associate justice. which
he didn't. and had thereby made it neces-
sary for the supreme court to vindicate
itself by a criminal action against him.
which he didn't-the Inter Mountain
} would rave demanded his prosecution. II
It so happened. however, that there wa
| no material disagreement between Judge
Hunt and DR.. Treacey as to matters O.
fact.
Their testimony coincided as closely q,
the evidence of any two witnesses OF
either side of the case. =
) The difference between them consisted
solely of a difference in Judgment as t,
the Interpretation which should be place.
on the facts related.
Only that and nothing more.
: It ds no reflection upon DR.. Treacey Of
: the one hand, or Judge Hunt on the other
( if these two citizens place a different con
struction upon the same set of facts.
veracity Is not in issue In matters o
judgment. but in questions Of fact.
If two persons agree as to the facts. a
did Judge Hunt and DR.. Treacey. differ
4 ences Of judgment as to their interpreta
: ton raise no question Of veracity.
0 Fewer arguments based on "ifs," an
q more liberal discussion Of the fact
would rebound ITO the credit Of our CON
temporary.
construction OF the federal building 4
this city. Work will in all probabidt
be commenced in the near future, begin
ming with the establishing of q perms
r nent grade. The government has foI
. warded to Mr.. Leyson the sum of On