Evening journal., 1913-09-22

approaching national triumph over
this deadliest foe or our rrce.
Respectfully yours.
AAAsMa, S. NJ MORGAN.
Mr.. Hastings Reply.
September l6, 1918.
Rev. S. NJ Morgan, Wilmington, Dela
ware.
Dear Sir: l received your letter Of
some days ago. after reading il in one Of
the daily papers.
I do not understand why letter in
tended, as you say, TO Ne one Of "kndly
but candid criticism" should he an "open
letter and should he given tc the press
al the same time. il not before, It was
mailed to me. do not understand your
object II it was intended to influence
my associate and myself from doing
what you consider wrong, it seems 10
me il would have shown a better spirit
in you to have made the letters personal.
l regret that my own conclusion is that
it was intended for an entirely different
purpose, and one that is unworthy of a
man who considers himself ITO be a
moral leader Of A wide influence as may
be
One paragraph OF your letter is as
follows
Il tremble IN my anxiety while
await the decision OF the Court; and
In this / but represent multitude OF
the best type of your and my fellow
citizens OF Delaware In this para
graph. If ] mistake not, I see what
prompted you 70 write your letter Of
kindly but candid criticism" Your
4.ts
Of the Court has IN my opinion. caus-
ed YOU to seek some means OF in
iuencing that Judgment, and this has
brought forth the kindly but candid
criticism" Of Counsel in the case
assume you are a law abiding
citizen and look upon the Constitu-
tion as the supreme law of the state.
The question before the Court Is the
constitutionality OF the law under
which the defendant is indicted. Can
It be true that you or any other moral
leader desires men or women punish-
ed under a law that is not constitu-
tional, and therefore, not a law at
all? Is Il possible that your anxiety
to restrict the use OF intoxicating
liquor has reached so far beyond rea-
son that you would have the Judges
of our Courts declare a law constitu-
tional when they knew II was notg
lie It true that you are ready to charge
that the Judges are Improperly In
fiuenced II they do not decide this
law constitutional
Then II none OF these things be
true why do you "tremble in your anx-
iety while you await the decision Of
the courter We are not disturbed
about the decision Of the court. We
believe the law unconstitutional. This
court may not agree with us but ws
have faith that the court will use it's
ast endeavor to reach a proper con-
clusion, and Will not be Influenced by
your open letter" or by any resolu.
tion OF your association. and that II
will do this regardless OF whether the
'dry territory would be banefully az
fected" for our "belligerent client"
But with respect to the service of
my colleague and myself. | want to
say think you are wholly unreason-
able. have known you and YOU have
known me for some time. During that
time / have defended ministers for
violation of the automobile law. and
I have prosecuted them for violation
of TIE marriage law. I have defended
men charged with larceny. highway
robbery and vote buying. have been
appointed by the court TO defend a
negro charged with attempted rape
on respectable white woman. and to
defend one who, In the night time in
cold blood, killed and robbed a respec-
table man. The court was bound to
appoint counsel under the law. and
] was bound, under my oath. to de-
tfend them. I sometime ago defended
la prominent Methodist who had been
Appointed to q high once and against
whom charges Of vote buying we're
brought; and in this latter case, you
lwere one OF my principal and most
willing witnesses.
But not until ! appeared az counsel
for man who had taken two quarts Of
whiskey to Sussex county for legiti
mate purposes did you see fit to ad
dress an open letter Of kindly but can
did criticism. Is not this defendant a.
much entitled to counsel as the other
defendants ! have mentioned. Anc
am I TO be held up by respectable men
like you as being a criminal, or in sym.
pathy with such criminals because
am the paid lawyer" of the defendant
Assuming the law to he unconstitu.
tional, would you and your brethren ID
the ministry, knowing that fact, and
sitting as jurors, vote to send a man
TO jailf Then where is the wrong in
my associate and myself, whether wa
are paid for it or not in suggesting to
the court that the defendant is indict.
ed under a law that Is void? Is theirs
anything unfair, immoral or unprofes-
sionsl about Il
AZ to your suggestion that you can
see "how the remuneration Of easily
coined and bloody dollars would be mu-
nifcient," ! would remind you that
there il room in your own profession for
at least some reform The average
minister makes little inquiry about
whether money contributed TO him has
been easily coined or is clean; and the
haste with which some perform the
marriage ceremony for oftentimes \
remuneration of easily coined and
bloody dollars" should be shocking TO
man who sets himself up TO be a
moral leader OF as wide influence az
may be"
! might call your attention to a spe-
cihc incident which should afford
some thought for reelection. /, as an
accommodation, some years ago, en-
dorsed a rather large note, together
with some other citizens, to be used
by the Antl-Saloon League. I had to
pay my share OF the note shortly af-
terward, as did many others, but that
organization, In charge OF a Meth
odist minister or ministers. misap-
propriated that money, sold the note.
and | was compelled to threaten;
prosecution before | could get the,
miSannrnnriafed fnnds rafnrnnd "A.