The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1912-05-29

Grand Forks Herald: 1t is a deli
cate matter to interfere in the social
customs of a community, and social
customs include the arnusements Of
the people. Various forms of amuse-
ment appeal to different people, and,
as a rule, so long as the amusements
are not vicious in themselves and do
not interfere unreasonabIy with the
rights of others, each person is per-
mitted to arnuse himself in his own
way, without interference from other
individuals, or from state or local
authorities.
Likewise, while the Arst day OF the
week, commonly called Sunday, has
been set apart by most or all Of the
states as a day Of rest, and while a
very general custom has established
II as a day of worship, the custom
prevails Of permitting each person TO
occupy himself Of that day as he sees
ft- so long as, in doing SO, he does
not trespass on the right Of other per-
sons to do likewise. This custom is
the result Of a growth, and is a mark
ed departure from the practice Of a
few generations ago. Government no
longer concerns itself as it did for
merly with the personal conduct of
the individual further than to see that
he does not interfere with the rights
of others. Accordingly old laws have
been revised and new customs have
been established. Any attempt to re-
turn, even n appearance, and in no
matter how slight degree, to the o
paterna1 practices of the past invaria-
bly, and inevitably creates friction and
brings forth protest.
Few things have been the subject
of more bitter controversy than Sun
day baseball, We have passed the
stage when serious attempts were
made to prevent the mere playing of
ball on Sunday for the fun of the
game. 1t is generally conceded so
long as the game does not create such
a disturbance as to constitute a serious
annoyance to persons in the vicinity,
people have the same legal right to
play ball on Sunday that they have
to walk, or ride, or attend church, or
occupy themselves in any other way.
The controversy is W professional
ball, that is, a game played for the
entertainment Of persons who pay for
the privilege of seeing 1t. This is
held, at least by the controvers4alists
on n side of the question, to be, in
this state a violation Of the statute
which prohibits public sports on
Sunday.
There is little room for doubt that
when the statute which vas incorpo-
rated in our laws was first framed it
was intended that IT should prohibit
this form OF sport And it is on this
intent that reliance is placed by those
who seek to prevent, by legal action,
the playing Of Sunday ball. This is
the law, we are told, and all good
citizens must obey the law. Most
people are essentially law-abidinR and
yet a very large proportion of them
are either actively or passively in ia
vor Of Sunday ball games. Why is
this?
The answer is found in the fact that
in all u collection Of statutes there
is much that is commonly regarded as
useless, mistaken or obsolete. In the
older states laws have been retained
which have no longer any bearing on
present conditions, and which have
long since outlived their usefulness.
Such laws have not been repealed, but
they have been forgotten, and are ig-
nored by mmo consent. New
states are organized, and the legal en-
actments and forms Of older states
are copied by them, often without
thought of their applicability. Again,
through the whim Of some lawmak-
ers and the indifferences Of others
new laws are often enacted which
have no real bearing on the conditions
Of the present. Because of these and
other similar facts people have grown
into the habit Of discriminatory
among their statute laws, and classify
ing some as timely. important and