The Montgomery advertiser., 1905-04-13
rHr CnRaEcr yIEW.

THE COHhECE NAHWs
 A recent incident in Indianapolis is we'll worth considering. The Police Commissioners of that city are ap- pointed by the Governor, and recently he removed them for their failure to enforce the laws. It was admitted that the laws against gambling and liquor selling had not been enforced. and that 1t was, the plain and sworn duty of the police to enforce them. as 1t was the duty of the Governor to see that his appointees did their duty. If they failed 1t was his duty as Gov ernor to remove them and appoint others.
 Under this admitted state of facts we find the Governor warmly criti- cised for his action in the premises. The Commissioners themselves plead in extenuation of their negligence that they had not been Instructed" by the Governor that he really wanted the laws enforced. It Is the strang- est plea we ever heard of. The laws against certain offences are plain and pointed. The police officials are sworn to enforce them. The Governor is sworn to "see that the laws are faithfully executed All this is not denied, but the people who do not want certain laws enforced are blam- ing the Governor for taking the only course open to him. This leads The Indianapolis Star to thus comment:
 A self-governing people cannot long remain free without respect for law. It is impossible for them to say, that other ignored, for some will want to ignore one law and others another and so on. until every law will find. a and as such should be enforced. If the majority of the people shall come to regard any. particular statute as repeating T it But while mf 5toYsaea 5t is a iaw a1 there should be no question whatever but that it will be enforced.
 There can be no middle ground in matters of this sort. Many laws lack very much of being perfect. Some are not only illogical but unjust and op- pressive. but they are laws. neverthe- less, and 1t is the duty of all officials to enforce them and of all good citi- zens to obey them. Even if we could feel justified in disregarding a cer- tain law we would have no right to do 1t because, as The Star argues, men would differ as to the laws they would disobey and the result would be that no law would be safe from vio- lation.
 The Governor was plainly right, just as any other appointing power would be right under like circumstan- ces Be he Governor, Judge, Mayor or any other official who has the appoint ing power he should require his ap- pointees to enforce the laws. If they fail he should remove them and ap- point men who will. If those under him fail or refuse to observe their sworn duties and to see that the laws are enforced he should remove them. If he does not he is just as guilty as they are. He cannot knowingly al- low faithless officials to remain in of- flee without sharing their unfaithful- ness and being a partner in their guilt.
 As we have said, some laws are H. logical and imperfect, and may be un- just, but that does not change the fact that they are laws to be enforced and obeyed. There is always provision made for the amendment or repeal of bad law. In one of his inaugurals | President Grant said: II know no method to secure the repeal of bad or obnoxious laws so effectual as their etricf nanatrucfinun and he uaa cor. rect. Strictly speaking we have no more right to disobey bad law than good one, for refusal to abide by or obey one tends to breed contempt for all The Governor of Indiana was right and his example should be fol- lowed by all who have the appoint ] ment of the executors of our laws.