The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1902-01-28
is 1T RIGHT, OR ISN'T IT?

IS IT RIGHT, OR ISN'T IT?
A petition was fled yesterday with the;
governor, bearing the signatures Of thir-
ty-six business firms and companies In
this city which was so remarkable that 1t
cannot be passed without notice. II the
signers of that petition, many of whom.
perhaps nearly all, signed under peculiar
pressure,-if the signers Of that petition
ever live to see the day on which they do
not regret having given their names to the
permanent records Of the governors office
and to the public in the connection in
which they appear appended to that docu-
ment, they are made of different stuff
from what we have supposed. The petit
ton referred to was request to the gov
ernor to take no immediate action against
the Northern Securities company, to give
time for testing by experience whether it
be good or bad, after which, if the results
are evil, vigorous proce edings may then
be taken in the supreme court of the
status. This petition, although dated
Dec. &c. 1901, for some reason, probably
owing to the difficulty encountered in
persuading enough business firms in Min
neapolis to sign such document to make
a fair showing, was not presented until
three weeks after legal proceedings had
been instituted by the state in the SUI
preme court of the United States, and did
not reach the governor till the very hour
in which the attorney general of the state
was engaged in making his plea at the bar
of the supreme court in behalf of the
honor and dignity Of the state and obedi-
ence to It's laws, this being the second
time 1t has been necessary to appeal to
that tribunal against the overriding by
the same party of the will of the people
expressed In the law of the common
wealth.
When that petition reached the governor
it received the treatment it deserved. 1t
was tossed aside unread. The governor
said he might look it over If he ever got
time, but he was very busy.
1t is to be hoped he will never get time.
The propriety or the improperly of this
| petition does not go to the merits of the
merger as business arrangement. 1t is
| to be judged by the attitude 1t assumes
! toward the enforcement of violated law
1t Is too late to spend any time discuss
ing whether the merger is violation o.
| the intent of the law. It's confessed OBJ
| ject is to destroy competition and rive,
! monopoly The popular Judgment hal
been and is that that is against public
policy and law was passed to prevent
| it. 1t takes a sharp man to draw a law
| that another sharp man cannot find some
way to get around If he wants to. Mr.
Hill wants to nullify this law. He tried
once before, but did not succeed. He /:
| trying again, although he must be full!
! advised of the moral quality Of his act
The governor is engaged In a hard fight
to enforce the law and protect the man
dates of the state from violation. That
his duty There isn't any room for con.
troversy on the point. Some things are
| settled in this world, and that's one O.
them.
| But Just at the time when he needs an6
should have the faithful, uncompromisine
J support of men of influence and position
he gets request from number of th'
leading business men of this city asking
him to get out of the way and let the mar
! who wants to set aside our laws because
they are in his way, do as he pleases will
| them. s@
What kind of precedent is that?
Suppose there was strike on Mr.. Hill:
road tomorrow, and all traffic stopped
and the signers of this petition could no
ship their goods to their customers, an(
/ found their business paralyzed so far a!
his lines are concerned, and the strikers
should claim that If they were let alone
| and allowed to have their way they wou}t
compel teHms under which they could bet
| ter serve the patrons of the road: Woult
there be any petitions from business mel
here or anywhere else asking the governor
not to maintain order or interfere will
! anv means the strikers might think i
| necessary to adopt in order to gain thei
ends? -.>.. ....--=.--" Fl
This shows the way this petition points
If the great and the powerful and the wis
NAV not be required to obey the law, wha
\ right have we to expect obedience from
the weak and the unfavored?
| Is this right, or isn't 1t?