The Farmington times and herald. (Farmington, St. Francois Co., Mo.) 1902-1905, 1905-07-07
The President Blunders.

with propriety he expressed more
harshIy. The eminent attorneys
selected by the administration to
investigate the case, MesSrs, lIar-
mon and JudSon, reported III favor
of bringing contempt proceedings
against the officials Of the Santa Fc
railroad for violating an injunction.
secretary Morton as one Of the of.
hrlals Of the Santa Fr was included
among the officers to he prosecuted.
Attorney General Moody, with
! President Roosevelt ) approval, re
fused 10 follow the recommended
tion of MraSrs. Harmon ana Jud.
SON
70 Justify the failure to prose
cute the Santa fe officials the prcst-
dent takes a position which 1t adj
Ecrcd to, will very much rmhauass
fine rrosrcution of railroads and
,,,., .o;.,,I. Mo, H.. l..rr
cuisines between corporation and
MS officers and insists that It IS not
only necessary to show that the
rnrporatInn has violated the Inv
f.r, n,o, ,ho ro.ro,.,,l, oo,,iol. -,
Wv ''''' -
'H' '"iI'"ra'l"" must TT '"'"" 1"
hr guilty. HE Government ;
special attorneys pointed outthot
fine evidence was IN kprniug of fine
..o,,,o,,.o,I ,,.,Il Lo ,ron,J,, ,,,,
W. '''' "'' , '
"cN' on 'rlai' h"' ''' reS'u'"' r.
Plies that the gulIt must be filed III
advance on some particular officer.
And then he prncrrds to say TINT IN
.,.. 49,, -. o..; ,.,., ,,,r l.. i...
90, '' Wv "''' ~ ~" - ="
MOI "''''"p't" i" p""''" 'he i'""S
OF the corporations violating the
law, but has SIMPLY rndcavored To-
stop the violations, lie cites the
merger cast and the beet trust case
to show that hr did not prosecute
officials.
Yes, aud he has been subjected
to just criticism for his failure to
enforce the criminal law IN this
ease Judge Holmes IN his dissent
| ing opinion III the merger eases
pointed that the officials should be
prosecuted rrlmlnalIy if the merger
was unlawful.
The President does not hesitate
to punish petty criminals; why
should lac be So tender with large
ones , When a man sells gallon
Of whlskry without license the
President does not rnJoln him from
doing 81 any more, hc prosecutcs
HIM and makes him feel the penal
| ~ of the law; why does he hesitate
10 prosecute the big men who tram
pie upon the statutes and the or
dcrs of the courtS1
The President has used good
deal of high sounding language
about the enforcement of the law,
and no one doubts that he means
It when he applies the language to
small Offenders, but does he mean
1t when the offenders are prominent
ana when millions instead OF hund.
reds are lnyolVed' lie seems so IN
rIlned to amend the commandment
as to make II read: Thou shalt
not steal on a small scale.
The President errs when he JUS.
titles refusal to prosecute the san.
Ia ZEE officials because other cor
porAte olilclaiS nave escaped pun
lShmcnt. lie cites the ease OF the
Harvester trust, but why has he
not prosecuted that trust II It Is
guilty II It IS not guilty then
the illustration loses us force; If it
IS guilty 1t ought to he punished.
1t IS absurd to first overlook It's
violations ana then use the lmmu
nltN granted to 1t ms reason for
granting immunity to the Santa fe.
But the President, apparently con.
SciouS That ms excuses are weak,
piles one upon another III Il vain
effort to fortlfy his position. lie
not only lays down dangerous
principle when he says that after
proving the corporation guilty the
Government must not prosecute
until 1t shows guilty knowledge in
the officers III charge; and he not
only submits a palpably absurd de.
Tense when he pleads failure to
prosecute one corporation to Jnst-
ty Il failure to prosecute another,
but he singles Secretary Morton