The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1907-05-26
ROOSEVELT AND DEMOCRACY.

ROOSEVELT AND DEMOCRACY.
On the theory that 1t is always un.
profitable to kick a skunk, no matter
how strong the provocation. The Herald
has heretofore paid no attention TO the
repeated assertion of Senator Shoots
newspaper that The Herald is owned
by the proprietors of the Tribune. But
even q skunk can. compel attention or
occasion, and the Smoot newspaper has
repeated its offensive and untruthful
statement until it calls for comment.
The Herald is owned by Senator w
A. Clark alone. No one else has dol
lar of interest in it, and no one else has
AS all men know, Senator Clark is and
always has been a Democrat His fideI-
ity TO party principles, his loyalty to
party candidates, has never been quo s.
toned. All of his life has been spent
In the service of the Democracy, and
the fact is perfectly we'll known 20 the
management of Senator Shoots organ.
&&
II happens that the owners of the Tri-
bune are associated with Senator Clark
in the San Pedro railroad and in the
ownership of Salt Lake real estate; but
It is a gratuitous insult to Senator
Clark TO assume that these business re-
lations would influence the attitude of
The Herald in political affairs AS a
matter of record. the columns of Thu
Herald afford ample evidence that il
has nothing in common with the Tri-
bune either in local or national politics.
~
In its issue of Saturday, Senator
Shoots newspaper said: "Once more
The Herald has listened to the counsel
of it's owners, the proprietors of the
Tribune. and has printed an snti-
Roosevelt editorial"
What kind OF editorial on Roose-
welt would any Democratic paper be
expected to print? Why should oppo-
sition TO Roosevelt in a Democratic
newspaper be made the basis of lying
lnnuendo?
Roosevelt has stolen some Demo-
cratic policies, it is true, but he has
disguised them and distorted them for
his own ends until Democrats all dis
own them. In his rate legislation he
managed to make the demand for eff
fective law against rebates and dis
elimination an agency for the conccn-
tration OF power in the hands OF the ex-
ecutive such as the founders OF the ma
ton never dreamed of. such as would
horrify them If they could know OF it,
He has utilized his tremendous in
tiuence as president TO punish his enc
mics and favor his friends.
He has encroached on the preroga-
tives of the legislative and judicial
branches OF government ruthlessly and
In disregard of every constitutional
limitation of the executive.
His every act as president has been
a defiance of Democratic belief, a re-
versal of all Democratic precedent.
In the San Francisco school case the
sion, every construction Of treaty obli-
cations since the con stitution was
adopted In a grave crisis he used his
place as president to intlmidate a state
and city already harassed beyond en-
durance by local calamity and forced
acquiescence in the abrogatio1 of state
rights that had been recognized ever
since there had been a state.
why shouldn't Democratic ncwspa-
per oppose him?
In his comment on the beef trust de-
cisien by Judge Humphrey, the presi-
dent showed a contempt of court, a dis
regard for propriety in one of his posi-
ton that was scandalous. His criticism
was coercives IN its intent fragrant
breach of the high regard for the fed
eral courts which is due from federal
officials, curt notice TO all federal
Judges that they must obey the execu-
tive will in their construction of the
law or expect no promotion on the
bench from this president The presi-
dents words could properly have been
rebuked by the court and punished as
the Judge saw fit IL they had been ut
tered by any one in less exalted posi-
ton.
After he had retired from the presi-
dency, Thomas Jefferson did not hest
tate to critieise courts and judges; but
he would as soon have thought of en-
bezzling government funds as of COM
menting unfavorabty or favorably on
court decision while he occupied the