The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-01-17
DissolDing "7he Solid South
By Bishop ". 4. candlsr

United States. There are fewer bar rooms and fewer people who want par rooms than in New England or the West. Prohibition counts for. more in the South than 1t does elsewhere In the Union.
 There are also fewer grsfters and less graft in the South than in any other section. Pennsylvania. the land of William Penn and unyielding solid arity, has shown more corruption In the building of her Capitol and in the government of the one city of Pittsburg than has been known in the entire South during a half-century if. the pe- riod of reconstruction be excepted when we were governed by outsiders. The Southern people have not been without faults; but they have been remarkably free from the covardly and sneakfsh vice of stealing. Public orficiais in the South have not been given to pilfering public funds.t -a s4
 Many other characteristic excellen- cies of the Southern people might be mentioned. but let these sufi1ce for the present. Is-it proposed that we shall change our principles with respect to these or any other matters7 If so, whyv Have our principles been demonstrated to be unsoundy If so, in what partlcur lar? If we are to, renounce our .princi- ples. what set of principles shall We put in their place? Has New England. or any other section, anything better to teach us? Is the land of the Pilgrim Fathers to mainatn an unyieidins solid arity while the South is to break up into classes of convenient size for in- struction by New England? Let New England show more Christianity. more children, better observance of the Sabbath, less drunkenness, and less graft before, we humbiy sit at her feet for instruction. We might have learned much from the New England of the Pil- grim Fathers, but we can learn little or value from the New England of their backslidden children.
 But 1t may be said that we must change our view of the relative powers of the State and Federal governments. This is not the time for that. It Is true that our picturesque President has as-' sured the country that we need through executive action, through leg islative action. and through judicial jn- depreciation and construction of law. to increase the power of the Federal gov ernment: but at the risk of invoivinE initiation into the "Ananias Club. or classification with the undesirable citi- zens." we are bound to tell him such talk is perfidy; to his official oath. He swore to support the Constitution. not to stretch it; and secession against the Constitution is worse than secession against the Uhion. for the Union draws It's life from the Constitution. The Un- ion without the Constitution is not the Federal Union, but the organized -tyran- ny of an interruptions majority doing as list with the rights and interests of the minority. If the Federal govern ment requires more power to fulfill It's mission under the conditions of the present day. there are easy and constt.' tutional ways of giving to 1t such pow CT: but it does not belong to the exec utiVe. legislative or judicial branches of the government to fflch power from the State or from the people even though they purloin it for the purpose of laying 1t in the lap of the Federal government.
 Federal Power.
 But does the Federal Government really need so much more power? It is said that there is going on in our country a perilous concentration of wealth in the. hands of few. Sup pose we centralize the government at the same time when this. process of con- centrating wealth Is going on. and that eventually the concentrated wealth