East Mississippi times. (Starkville, Miss.) 19??-1926, 1911-06-16

TO JeOpardlZe our rights ana inter
ests as a common people, but it Is
the right of the humblest citizen
of the comm0nw wealth to do so. II
this is not true, then our officials
are not our public servants, but
we are a common peasantry who
dare not question official action ;
We yield to the operation of the
ancient doctrine which prevailed
that the King can do no wrong
We are but the contributing sub
iects of an official regime and in
woke doctrine which bellies oul
form of government and places
nitroglycerine at its very founda-
ton.
The records of Il public servant
are the witnesses of his steward
ship. They are the footprints
which he leaves behind him point
ing the way he has taken. They
are his protection against vicious
assault and his covert from tue
harrassment of unjust criticism
To him who has kept sacred the
trust which has been committed to
him by the people, they are the
lights unto the pathway of such as
would judge enormously and .
lamp unto the feet of such as as
sail public reputation. They speak
for men after life's mortal coil has
been shutfied off and their account
ing rendered finally and according
to the Arch Angels record.
On the other hand, they tel. the
people who have trusted, of the
error of those whom they trust,
and they tell it, not i'll the hand
writing of the people, but in the
handwriting of the official
Assuming that there can be no
question of the right of the people
to Judge their public servants cac-,
cording to the record, if the poo-
pie call into question this record,
is it right that they should be met
with contempt and charged with
slandering, vilifying and lyingg
If this record shows unfaitY1fulness
upon the part Of the person max
ing it, have not the people a right
to call upon that person to make
an effort to satisfy their minds as
to any irregularities? Surely this
is reasonable. Suppose the guar
dian in charge Of IL child's estate
should present to the court an ac-
count of his guardianship. which
showed Irregularities, expenditures
made, but no vouchers to show for
what purpose, Investments of
guardianship Ilspey with no ac.
counting for stIm Investments, ap-
preparation of this money to the
use of the guardian without eXpla-
nation, established by proof, that
such appropriations were ,legal2
Would the court having iariSdic-
ton grant anncquittance to such
a gpardisp~ and his boNlssbfn ?
Would it not be a.poof law that
would authorize a court to take such
actien? We must all concede that
III would be indeed a law most siar.,
gerous toSks, interests of the M
ftttuhate Children of our country.
Suppose that when called to ac-
count, such a guardian should re-
fuse to answer, but, to the con-
trary, should tackle the court with
such language as we have seen in
print since the beginning of this
campaign This would inevitably
result in the Imprisonment of The
guardian. 1t is argued that it is
upon the opposition to Mai. Var
daman to prove his guilt under tho
charges of crookedness beyond Z
reasonable doubt. This is especial.
iy argued by Judge Blount. This
Is true in matters Of criminal pros
ecutions. But, we must not forget
that where fiduciary relations ar,
involved, the rule of evidence i.
widely different from that an.
I 1ilollnced BY Judge BIouut. GOV