The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1910-05-02

East Indian cotton in competition Will
the Southern staple.
a CASE or "yOU'RE ANOTHER."
The Ballinger investigation is sim
mering down to question OF
personal veracity. Secretary Bal
lnger who was on the stand all day
saturday, stated his side of the case
and denied. absolutely and in toto. the
charges made against him of order
ing lands restored to settlement for
questionable reasons. lie declared
that he never ordered lands restored
to the use of settlers unless he had
been requested to do so by the Re-
clamation Service. and he fatty de-
nounced the charge that he had re-
stored one particular section of land
which had been withdrawn by secre-
tary Garfield. The order, he said had
come before he. took office.
When the cross examination is con-
Guided, and when all the witnesses
in behalf of Secretary Ballinger have
been heard-if such a thing can pos
sbly happens before new Congress
meets-the Pinchot mascots will again
take the stand in rebuttal and will
probably repeat all the charges they
have made Those whom Bailinger
has called liars will call him another,
and the matter will rest just where
it was when the investigation began.
given verbally; their exact date cannot
be proved, and when the lie has been
passed to the satisfaction of all parties
concerned the circus will be over.
Ballinger will remain Secretary of the
Interior until he gets ready to retire.
and Pinchot can still talk through the
papers.
AS the investigation goes, however,
two things appear pretty clearly
through the maze of charges. counter
charges, recriminatlon and abuse. 1t
has been perfectly manifest. from
start to finish. that the question is one
of law against no law, or, one might
say. of Taft against Roosevelt. 1t is
highly possible, and, in some cases,
more than probable, that the operation
of the law aided men who were using
the Government lands to foster pri-
waite enterprises OF DOUBTFUL character;
and perhaps some of the lands which
Ballinger ordered restored to settle
ment were seized by the water power
| trust" whatever that legendary body
! may be. Yet this does not change the
law in the case The remedy was not
to violate the law. and to withdraw
the lands, but to change the law and
then withdraw the lands. Even where
pinchot was right in fact-and some
times he doubtless was-he was wrong
in law. If Ballinger was wrong in fac
| and perhaps he sometimes was-h
| was right in law. Both were sworn t
maintain the law; when the one failet
| to do so he forfeited his office: wher
the other upheld the law he was abus.
| ed. Yet it would no more be fair to
say that the Supreme Court should in
! validate a bad but constitutional law
4 than it would be to say that Ballingei
/ would be justified in overriding the
law because that law old not please
4 pinchot.
1t is we'll settled. too. that there was
more of personal grudge in Pinchot's
attack than of a consuming de
sire for the public veal. Pinchot wa
Il spoiled child of the Roosevelt
regime; footed far and wide as the
"Conservator OF the Nation" and when
men came into office who had no espe-
cial reason for honoring him above
other men, he began to pout. He IS
pouting yet. and he probably will not
smile when Ballinger is cleared. as he
surely will be. And ought to be.