The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1904-08-10

mob. Notwithstanding the fact that the
constitution OF each state guarantees ]
to every person within its jurisdiction
that his life. his liberty or his property
shall not be taken from him without
due process OF law.
I'm struggle between employers and
employees. dynamite IS said 70 have been
used by the latter, resulting in the Joss
of life and the destruction Of property.
The perpetrators of this offense against
the laws of God and man, and all others
engaged IN The conspiracy with them.
should. after due trial and conviction,
have had melted out TO them the most
rigorous punishment known 10 the law.
This crime, added perhaps to others, led
to the forma ton OF q committee or
citizans that. with the support OF the
military authority. deports from the
State. without trial, persons suspected
OF 5elon ging to the organization OF
which the perpetrators Of the dynamite
outrages were supposed TO be members
Force Instead of Law.
In both cases the reign OF law gave
way TO the reign of force. These Illus
trations present some evidence of the
failure Of government TO protect the
citizen and his property, which not only
justified the action of your convention
in this regard. but made It its duty To
call attention 20 the fact that cOnSti-
tutionaI guarantees are violated when
ever any citizen is denied the right to
labor. to acquire and 10 enjoy prop
erty, or 70 reside where MS interests
or inclination may determine ana lhe
fulfllment Of the assurance 10 repuAe
and punish all denials Of these rights,
whether brought about by lndlyldu3ls
or government age@cieS' sIlqulu I,,, DS
forced by every ofhclai ana SupPoi1SO
by every citizen .. To-,
THE essence Of good government lleS
in strict observance OF constitutional
limitations. enforcement of law ana
order and rugged opposition 20 al en- en-
croachment upon the sovereignty OF the
people.
1.-The foregoing suggestions but en-
phasfze the distinction which exists pc
tween our own and many other forms OF
government It has been well said, In
substance. that there are but two pow
ers in government, one the power Of the
sword. sustained by the hand that
Yields 1t. and the other the power of
the law, sustained by an enlightened
public sentiment.
1.-THE difference in these powers is the
difference between a republic-such as
ours based on law and a written con-
stitution. supported by intelligence, VIZ
tue and patriotism-and MONARCHY
sustained by force eXeTted by an IN
ldividual, uncontrolled by laws other than
those made or sanctioned by him; one
represents cOnstitutionalism, the other
| Imperialism
Tariff Law Unjust.
..The present tariff law il unjust in
its operation. excessive in many Of its
rates and so framed in particular in
stances as TO exact inordinate profits
| from the people. So well understood
has this view become that many promi-
/ ,F
! and at least TWO OF Its State cOnyen-
lions. have dared to voice the general
| sentiment on that subject.
THAT party seems. however. TO be col
/ leCtivcly able to harmonic only upon
| a plank that admits that revision may
I from time 10 time b. necessary, but il is
! so phraScd that II is expected to be
satisfactory to those in favor of an in
! crease Of duty, 10 those who favor n re-
ductiOn thereof, and TO those opposed 70
/ any change whatever.
Judged by the record OF performance.
| rather than that Of promise. on the
part Of that party IN the past. Il would
I seem a ; If the outcome In the event 6
/ its success. would b. 20 crafty the lat
I ter class. With absolute control OF
| both the legislative and executive de
[ partments OF the Government since
I March I. 1897. there has been neither
I reduction nor an attempt AZ reduction
/ in tariff duties.
| 1T is not unreasonable TO assume. in
the light OF that record. that q future
! Congress OF that party viii not under
! take a revision Of the tariff downward
! IN the event that II shall receive an in
| dorscment of its past course on that
! subject by tho people. Il is a fact end
should be frankly conceded that though
our party may be successful In the COM
/ ing contest we cannot hope 20 secure a
majority in the Senate during the next
! four years. and hence we shall be uu-
/ able to secure any modification in the
/ tariff save that 10 which the S<epubli-
can majority in the Senate may con-
sent
No Assurance Of Relief.
while. therefore. we are unable 10
| give assurances of relieh to the people
/ from such excessive duties as burden
them. it is due to them that we state
our position TO be in favor OF a rea-
sonable reduction OF the tariff; that
we believe that it is demanded by the
best interests OF both manufacturer and