The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1905-07-08
p00R KANSAS MUST BLEED ON
,rs Sr.pRENE COURT KILLS THE
STATE OIL REFINERY.
.,,,. ,,ust Not Make a Scarecrow OF the
Law" quotes the Opinion. which
gently ,Josl,es Gov. HOch. Yet Speaks
,nk,nd,y OF the standard oil Company.

royvx, Kan. July kansas will not
...nl a state oil refinery to enter into COM
a,i,,,r with the Standard Oil Company
r,s supreme Court to-day handed down
- oninjon in which all the Justices con-
r,--ad holding the law passed by the
ya,isla,ure last winter providing for the
..,ah,;shment Of branch penitentiary at
and a state oil refinery in connection
..a.,uith to be wholly unconstitutional.
Tho court evidently regards the branch
renitentiary provision as the mere suoter-
i,as. which il was termed by the opponents
=, tbe bill in the fight last winter.
The court cites the special measure OF
90 Uoch approving the bill and points
out particularly that the failure OF the
Goyernor to refer to the branch peni-
,er,iarv went far toward making up a
r,aard which shows that it was the inten-
ian II the trainers Of the bill to establish
refinery rather than penal institution.
The opinion says in part;
.The hill in question having originated,
90 e,pressed in the message, in popular
demand for relief against powerful COM
,norcial combatant, against which the
vidl,al was unable to cope, 1t met the
hearty and enthusiastic approval OF the
Governor, not as an appropriation to build
a branch penltentiary, but as an appro-
lnriation for the construction and opera
Hon of an oil refinery; and inasmuch as no
IN NAV be said that the Governor did not
Understand that there were any provisions
In The bill which seriously contemplated
The building Of a branch of the State peni-
lentiary.
The Governor dscloses his apprehen-
Lon of the constitutionality of this bill
lin his comparison OF the Feasibility OF the
lmany plans which had been suggested for
Ehe repression Of the greed OF this 'rapa
locus corporation with his own, which was
M appropriate $50 900 for n experimental
refinery at lansing.
II, a. contended by the State. the object
kt bill ia the construction OF branch
Ir.nitentary. it seems strange that the
Governor in approving 1t should feel called
|rpon tn say that it il such radical de-
|nr,ure from governmental precedent that
IN seems wise to put upon the eoords a
Ieear statement Of the provocation and
Itbe purpose of this undertaking so
That our action is clearly defined and
thoroughly understood at home and
abroad The construction of penal In
|titutions is not radical departure from
governmental precedent. The 'provoca-
IllOu i'l 'ihlhit"h'i'S ouS' i'S'At"tioHo 10
known to all persons. Besides, what in
Iteress ha We the people abroad on the sub
Iiect Of our penal institutions that for their
|hneft our action should be clearly de-
|fned?' The indictment Of the Standard
Lon Company ia no doubt true and the
|ppvocation was very great. but
/ we must not make a scarecrow OF the law,
setting it up to fear the birds OF prey"
Gov. Hoch Is greatly disappointed. K
Ibid hoped that we would be allowed to go
Id Rockefeller" he said Il am convinced
|tht we could have made a success Of it,
Iasd know that the people of the State
v1ntsd it tried Our refinery would have
Iecoma3ed Independent refineries, and
b too bad that We cannot 60 ahead with
h. Il were the Supreme Court we would
N on and build Il and make success Of it.
II u not constitutional 1t ought to be-"