The National tribune., 1909-01-14

of Nebraska, in forbidding the use OF
the flag of the United States for pur-
pose of mere advertisement, infringes
10ny right protected by the Constitution
of the United States, or that it relates
to a subject exclusively committed to
the National Government. From the
earliest periods in the history. of the
human race banners, standards and en-
signs have been adopted as symbols OF
power and history of the peoples who
bore them. 1t is not, then, remarkable
that the American people. acting thru
the legislative branch of the Govern
ment, early in their history, prescribed
a flag as symbolical of the existence
and sovereignty Of the Nation. Indeed,
it would have been extraordinary II the
Government had started this country
upon its marvellous career without CIV
ing 1t a flag to be recognized as the
emblem of the American Republic. For
that flag every true American has not
simply an appreciation, but deep af-
fection. No American nor any foreign
born person who enjoys the privileges
of American citizenship. ever looks up
on it without taking pride in the fact
that he lives under this free Govern
ment. Hence it has often occurred that
insults to a flag have been the cause of
presence of those who revere it have
often been resented and sometimes
punished on the spot.
'It may be said that as the flag Is an
emblem of National sovereignty, 1t was
for Congress alone. by appropriate leg
islation, to prohibit its use for illegiti-
mate purposes. We cannot yield to this
view: If Congress has not chosen to
legislate on this subject, and II an en-
actment by it would supersede State
laws of like character, it does not fol-
low that, in the absence of National
legislation, the State is without power
to act There are matters which by
legislation may be brought within the
exclusive control of the General Gov
ernment, but over which in the alb
sence of National legislation the State
may exert some control in the interest
of its own people.
by the statute in question the State
has in substance declared that no one
subject to its jurisdiction shall use the
flag for purposes of trade and traffic
purpose wholly foreign to that for
which it was provided by the Nation.
Such use tends to degrade and cheap
en- the flag in the estimation of the
people, as well as to defeat the object
of maintaining 1t as an emblem of Ma
tional power and National honor. And
we cannot hold that any privilege of
American citizenship or that any right
of personal liberty is violated by a
State enactment forbidding the flag to
be used as an advertisement on bottle
of beer. 1t is familiar law that even
the privileges of citizenship and the
rights inhering in personal liberty are
subject TO their enjoyment to such rea-
sonab!e restraints as may be required
for the general good. Nor can we hold
that any one has right of property
which is violated by such an enactment
as the one in question. If it be said
that there is a right of property in the
tangible thing upon which a rep-esen-
tation of the flag has been placed, the
answer is that such representation
which in itself cannot belong as prop
erty to an individual-has been placed
on such thing in violation of law, and
subject to the power of Government to
prohibit its use for purposes of adver-
-tisement.
Looking. then, at the provision relat-
ing to the placing of representation OF
the flag upon articles of merchandise
for purposes Of advertising, we are of
opinion that those who enacted the
statute knew, what is known of all
that to every true American the flag is
the symbol of the Nations power, the
emblem OF freedom in its truest, best
sense. IT is not extravagant to say that
to all lovers of the country 1t signifies
government resting on the consent OF
the governed, liberty regulated by law,
the protection of the weak against the
strong. security against the exercise OF
arbitrary power, and absolute safety
for free institutions against foreign ag-
gressfon.
"It would be going very far to say that
the statute in question had no reason
able connection with the common good
and was not promotive of the peace,
order and well-being Of the people.
Before this court can hold the statute
void it must say that, and in addition.
adjudges that 1t violates rights secured
by the Constitution of the United States.
We cannot so say, and cannot so ad-
Judge.
without further discussion we hold
that the provision against the use of
representation Of the flag for advertis-
ing articles of merchandise is not re-
pugnant to the Constitution Of the Unit
ed States. It follows that the judgment
of the State court must be affirmed"
At the close of the hearing Judge
Parker, of New Jersey, who as Chair
man of the Subcommittee on judi
ciary, presided over the hearing, spoke
with perfect frankness of the difficulties
that lie in the way of the flag legisla-
ton, but also said that he favored It,
ana WOulQ btuuy tHt
matter with his committee and report
a bill if possible. Those who attended
the hearing felt much encouraged.
Mrs. Ball, who represented the Wo-
mans Relief Corps. instituted the OBJ
servance Of Flag Day IL the District
in 1895, and prepared the first Flag
Day program. Mrs. Mary NJ. North
drafted the bill which got $4,000 from
Congress that same year to place flags
over the flagless 100 school houses OF
the District of Columbia, and Mrs. An
ME w. Johnson was President of the
Department of the Potomac in 1896
when the money was available for the
flags, and it was only after infinite
labor that she was able to have tnc
law appropriating money for flags" Il
be construed into meaning ''hagpoles'
also. not a school house having a plac;
where flag could be put. In this sh'
was aided by Col. McElroy, who wa:
then Commander of the Departmeu
| of the Potomac, G. A. R.
The Flag.
| Comrade M c. Huyette, Buffalo, n
Y, sends US the following toast to tn
Flag:
The Flag.
"All Salute. We followed it in sun
shine and in storm: in the heat of Sum
mer and through the SHOWS of Winter
we kept in line with IL in the smoke o