Twice-a-week plain dealer. (Cresco, Howard County, Iowa) 1895-1913, 1904-03-25
Especial Washington Letter.

lSpecial washington letter.
~ KEAT cry and little wool" may
- be accepted as a proper de-
a ~ scription of the recent hula
baloo in the house of repre-.
sentatives over the postofice scondal
The most violent speeches ever heard
were made. Such veteran Republican
orators as General Charles Henry
Grosvenor and Colonel William Peters
Hepburn had blood in their eyes, and
struck about them with the ferocity
Of wounded bears. That was on the
first day of the debate. 1t was to be
continued next day, and at 4 o'clock
a vote was to be taken as to whether
general investigation should be or
dered into the affairs Of the postofflce
department Had the vote been taken
at the close of the first days speech.
making, or even at o'clock on what
was to have been the second day OF the
speechmaking, there is no sort of ques.
ton but that the investigation would
have been ordered by large majority,
but Mr.. Croft of South Carolina died
early on the day on which the vote was
to be taken. This gave the Republican
leaders this one day (thc house ad.
journing in memory of Mr.. Croft to
whip in the recalcitrants, and, notwIth-
standing the fiery speeches made
against the postoffice department, the
investigation into departmental cor,
ruption was killed by strict party
vote. They passed a sort of sham reso.
luton to investigate the house and the
alleged connection of members with
certain increases of salary under the
department.
That the postof11ce department ought
to be investigated there is no sort of
question and 1t should include the en-
tire department from top to bottom.
While they are about it all the depart
ments ought to be overhauled. If the
Democrats had captured the house i'll
1902 we would probably have found
enough material, by investigation. to
elect two presidents. Altogether it was
another case Of monies parturient ct RI
diculus mus est (the mountains are in
labor and preposterous mouse Is the
result.
Five to Four.
It is to be regretted that the great
and important merger decision was
rendered by divided court, standing
five to four. The ancient saw which
the old field schoolmasters used to
"set as copy" for youngsters, Many
men of many minds" appears to apply
to supreme court judges as well rs to
smaller folk. A unanimous courts de-
cision would have probably settled the
matter for all time to come, but as the
judges stood five to four, with Mr.. JUS
tice Brewer Zone of the five) "hemlning
and having" at that, the decision is
really an invitation to the trusts to
pick their flints andftry 1t again. Some
years ago some one asked a supreme
court judge of certain state what the
court was doing "Oh," replied the
Judge, who was somewhat of a wag,
1--WE are guessing off cases. and he
was not SO very far wrong. This Is
demonstrated by the fact that in ad-
dition to this merger case two of the
most important decisions rendered by
the supreme court in the last ten years
were rendered by divided court
standing five to four. These were the
income tax case and the insular case.
Nobody is ever satisfied by being de-
feated "by the skin of his teeth" in a
lawsuit, an election or in anything
else, while an overwhelming defeat is
decisive.