The Evening standard. [volume] (Ogden City, Utah) 1910-1913, 1910-09-17


dore Roosevelt returned 10 the de-
fense of his new nauonalIsm7 today,
as was specifically indicated in the
title of his address at the state fair
here, The New Nationalism and the
Old Morality
"The new nationallsm" he reltcr-
ated. means nothing but an appllca-
ton TO new conditions OF certain old
and fundamental moralities. IL
means an invitation TO meet the new
problems OF the present day In pre-
clsely the spirit in which Lincoln and
the men of his day met their new
problems"
To his critics he put this issue. "Is
anv party willing TO take the other
side OF the propositions Of which COM
plant Is made II so, II would be a
good thing 10 have the Issue before the
people for In the end the people would
most certainly decide IN favor OF the
principles embodied In the new ma
tonalism because otherwise this
country could not continue to be Il
true republic. a true democracy"
The speaker followed this with a
Justification of his attacks on the SUI
preme court OF the United States He
chose TWO arguments--one. that In his
criticisms he had merely echoed the
minority opinions of the court Itself,
the other that he had illuStrious pre-
cedent-the example of Abraham LIN
coin. who, he said, had been far more
outspoken than he himself had ever
been, and the example of President
Taft, from whose utteranccs fifteen
years ago In favor Of public criticism
Of the courts he quoted.
Take for instance" he continued.
what ] said in reference TO late de-
cisigns OF the supreme court One
decision was in the Knight sugar case
in which. according TO the dissenting
opinion OF Justice Harlan. the court
placed the public so far as national
power is concerned (the only power
which could be efTectiyel entirely at
the mercy OF the combinations which
arbitrarily control the prices OF ar
ticleS purchased TO be transported
from one state Into another state
II merely took the view which the
learned Justice had taken In his dis
scnting opinion. Those who criticise
nc dlt dloO llllltloll6 lN7N'N' ~
the supreme court Mr.. Harlan. SO
my critics take the position that the
people shall not be able to control
the activities and management Of
these monopolistic corporations do
ing an interstate business? II so,
let them frankly avow their position,
If not. let them cease their critic
ism
The other case mentioned was one
prohibiting New York state To regu-
late hours OF work in bakeshops; and
again the speaker said he had based
his criticism on a dissenting opinion
within the court Itself
"FifJy-thrce years ago" he contin-
ued. Abraham Lincoln was assailed
for his repeated criticisms of the SUI
preme court in ,he 'Dred Scott case.
As regards this decision, he announc-
cd not once, but again and again,
that he held IL TO be not merely the
right. but the duty of citizens who
felt that judicial decisions were er
roneous and damaging. Loyalty to
abide by the decisions as long as they
stood. but to try hard 10 secure their
reversal: his language on an occasion
being as follows We do not propose
to disturb the rights OF property thus
settled. but propose so resisting the dc
clsion az TO have the question re
opened. n we can and new judicial
rule established upon the subject
He repeated this statement in
slightly different language In speech
after speech, Moreover, he used very
strong language about the decision
far stronger than I dream Of using
or that Fl would BIO proper TO use
about the decisions with which ] now
deal. But his View as to his right
and duty to call attention 10 an er
roneous decision which vitally affect
ed the rights Of the people, was.
think. entirely sound. Al any rate
II | have erred. in commenting as
have commented upon the decisions
IN question. | err in company with
Abraham Lincoln, The criticism ot
me is perhaps well summed up II
the following speech OF an eminent
public man:
He makes war on the decisions o
the supreme court ] wish TO say tC
YOU fellow citizens that have no wal
to make on that decision or any Other
ever rendered by the supreme court
am content TO take that decision as
u stands delivered by the highest ju
dicial tribunal on earth. tribunal as
tablishcd by the constitution OF Tho
United States for tnat purpose and
hence that decision becomes the Law
OF the land, binding on you, on ms
and on every other citizen. whether
We liko II oWnot Hence ! do moi
seek to enter into an argument tC