Daily Kennebec journal., 1914-02-05
The Case of DR.. Berry.

Another
w case is the intemperate attitude OF
certain organizations in declaring .hell
belief in Mr.. Berrys innocehce wltiioue
any acquaintance with the law Vi II,
bel or the facts which were preseheeu
to the grand jury that founo the IN
dictment or to the other jury Which
found Mr.. Berry guilty.
one of these organizations was tne
Bangor Convccation, which In teie-
gram declared that the organization,
which was attended by clergymen OF
all religious faiths from Eastern Maine,
did not believe Mr.. Berry guilty out
a sufferer in the cause of righteousness.
-Biddeford Record
On the contrary, these Christian or
ganizations know Doctor Berry and
bis high purpose too well to believe
him guilty of anything more vicious
than determination to uphold the law
which the people of this State have
enacted.
DR.. Berry may or may not have vio-
presses no opinion upon that point for
the reason that the case is still before
the court. and the ultimate issue OF
Dr.. Berry's guilt or innocence is yet
to be determined. It would be both
futile and in poor taste for the Journal
to discuss the proposition of law which
will now go forward on exceptions.
will be argued by able counsel, and will
be given the most careful considera-
ton by the Supreme Court.
But we think it entirely proper to as
sert our belief that DR.. Berry or any
other citizen, or the public press. has
the unquestioned right to criticise the
judicial administration of any law en-
acted by the people. If this is not
so, then we have ceased to be Re-
public, and have become an oligarchy.
The issue of free speech and of free
and legitimate criticism of public Of
ficials is incidentally involved in this
case. and we believe the law goes very
far, and are not prepared to say that
it might not justly go farther, in pre-
serving to the people this fundamental
right.
In a word, the Journals position is
that go long as citizen does not i'm
pugn the motives of a public official,
he is within his rights in criticising the
acts of that official, and in pointing out
what he believes to be the dangerous
or ill-advised consequences of those
acts.
AS to whether DR.. Berry exceeded the
limits of legitimate criticism in the
case under consideration, we express
no opinion for reasons above indicat-
ed, but we do say that we entirely
agree with that gentleman in his view
on the practical effect of Justice Hal
ey's policy in the liquor cases.
If any one proposition has been set
tied by the people of Maine during the
la ST three wears il is that the nrohibi-
tory law shall be retained upon the
Statute books. and that it shall, and
must be, enforced. That the policy of
fining rum-sellers, instead of imposing
jail sentences, is calculated to defeat
the repeated verdict of the people, is
too evident a proposition to discuss.
We end, therefore, as we began, with
the assertion that in any event, and
whatever may be the result of the
pending cases, we believe, and think
that majority of the right-thinking
citizens of this State will believe, that
DR.. Berry's motives were pure and
that no personal element or motive
consciously entered into his criticism Of
the action of Justice Haley.
Salvation Army Work.