The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-01-12
wHYs

more extenueQ loEms NHt &fe lo8fsi@- tors and public onicials In constant fear of ono man? A writer in one of the magazines asserts that Mi. Hughes hope of success with the Leg isiature lies largely in President Roose- welt" Then he goes on to say that with his Federal patronage and strong personal influence the President can command the New York Legislature as he dictated it's course at the last ses- sion.''
 Is not this discrsditsbie, to say the very least of 1t? MT Hughes was cleo ted Governor of New York and there has been much favorable comment stv- en to his personal character and to his piedses in favor of an honest admin tstration. He was elected by the peo- pie of that great state and it has been Aannounced far and wide that he would govern without dictation or leading strings. yet we are gravely told that his success with the legislature de- pends on Roosevelt
 And so the members composing the New York Legislature were elected by the people of that State, and tUose peo- pie naturally supposed that the Lcgis- lature thus chosen would be an inde- pendent, self governing body. free from bossing or domination. Now we are given to understand that the mem- bers of that assembly will look to Roosevelt for suidance--or rather for dfctation as to what they shall do. As The New Bedford Standard. Repub- ilcan paper, says. if this means that the legislature of a great state will not do it. duty unless commanded by the dis tribution of patronage and pressed by the personal influence of the president. we might as well admit here and now that government by the people is . dead failure"
 We agree with The Standard, but the evil does not begin or end with a State Legislature. The same enervat- ing influence extends to- the halls of Congress. Representatives who wero elected by the people, and eSenators chosen by the states--all supposed to be free and independent American citi- sens. suffer themselves bound hand and foot to the tail of the Roosevelt char tot. Not ali of them are thus sub servient, but many undoubtedly are. Why? we again ask. They are cer- tainiy not afraid that he will do them any personal injury. A brave and con- scientious member of Congress should not fear that he can be injured among his home people by Roosevelt or any other President. Such servant of the people or of the States should not fear any enmity or influence from any per- son or power in washington. but they do
 Again we ask why7 Patronage and personal influence are the reasons for Submission. Some members allow themselves dominated and controlled by the Presidents alleged strong per sonality and prove false to the trust reposed in them. They are afraid that if they exercise independence and are guided by their own will they will lose some crumbs of patronage that might otherwise fall to them. They want places and appropriations. and to get them they literally become dumb driv- en cattle" to be bossed. dictated to and controlled by the man who chances to be President. This is not credi- table. Members of any legislative body who will surrender their manhood and their independence and yield to the patronage and personal influence" of q President or a Governor are not fit representatives of genuine Americans. They are little better than thralls and ought to realize their condition and shake off the shackles.
 Let us give another modern instance of the weakness of which we have been speaking. We are told by one of our contemporaries that the President Is very angry because his district judges ployers liability act" Here his at- tempted domination reaches out to the judges who are sworn to fairly iTi- terpret the laws. He wanted this law enacted and a complacent Congress gratified his desires. Now when the judges are holding that the act is un- constitutional he Is very angry" Of course he Is. He considers 1t a grave offence for any official. judicial or oth- CT, to throw doubts on his judgment or run counter to his wishes. and we are further informed that he "has in structed his Attorney General to make a list of those decisions" Possibly he intends to have the obstinate judges hauled | for less mapeste.
 But what of the Congress which en- acted the Jaw at his behest? Con- gressman Senkins. of Wisconsin of the House Judiciary Committee. makes this humiIiating admission: T believed the bill was unconstitutional when we pass ed 1t, but Congress seemed to want to take the chances" Just SO. but why did Congress want it? For no other reason than that Roosevelt wanted t and they were willing to take the chances" to please him rather than take the chances of losing something by opposing him. We know nothing of the constitutional phase or side Of the matter nor do we wish or care to discuss the merits or demerits of the hjIl Wa ara cIting fhta instance to