The Idaho recorder. [volume] (Salmon City, Idaho) 1886-1927, 1916-10-06
THE DIVIDING LINE IN THE
NATIONAL. CAMPAIGN.
Lewiston Tribune,

ing the difference that separates the
two great parties, even as ~ a single
debatable question, aud scaroelt ex
cepting the omn'prts-nt arm con
cerning which there Is no suarp line
AZ has heretofore existed between the
free traders and the nigh protection
lists. IL is Quite true Judge Hughes
and his collaboraJors IND fault WITH
practically everything the opposition
has done during It's administrative
term, tut II IL equally tTae tlat no
alternative policy has neen propos d
ia any II these instances aud IT
that reason their campaign seems ~
lack effectiveness In persua1ing the
people to east of the one and take on
the luther. still, there Is IL material
difference ber I, cen the two opponents
ami that Is decisive VA forming poll
teal alignment the judicial tenn
prrment and poiae ~ th one, the
aynamic qualities OF the 9th l.. The
,aIrit OF the times see ls one that u
more IN need ~ the latter, of impulse
ana action than al the former ot
deliberate aud formal Weighing OF
Ire equities before taking up y
course. Tnls differentiation is clear.
N seen Ia the chief question upon
.Nlru Judge Hughes Is hasinR his
campaign that Of the haste ana
pressure under which the eight hour
hll was enacted, Tie president pro
posed ann promoted the legislation
Ia Az inpetuOus mument There
seems scarcely any doubt oI that
There need not be any doubt either
AZ 10 his own Affirmative convictions
on the subject, and yet he scarcely
answers the criticisms OF treats tie
question ia eut,re fTaukness Ia dis
claiming any threal and assuming NIL
responsibility for the Initiation Of
the policy The hrotherhoods we're
not asking for the bill, although they
probably welcomed It's proposal as a
means OF withdrawing from dagger
Gus climax, hut the pressure OF this
climax and tile resulting public dis.
orders acted as mena'e nevertheless
and resulted In tho passage Of the
law. La ignoring that sitnatlon aud
taking the ground that approved
public policy alone inspired the hill,
the president has scarcely been quite
open In Analysing the controversy. On
the other hand, Judge hughes, out
of his own mouth, would not have
resogted to the Legislative power At
that time, or until convinced along
with congress, upon all the major
polnts affecting the issue That At
titudv while suitable to settled and
tranquil periods, Il scarcely What tn,
present unsettled and turbulent per
led requires The federal reseTy,
system would s,ill nave been VA the
making had Judge Hughes been IL
the executive oriice during the pres
ent term. so would the federal faru
banking scheme and other great act,
which has required the president
driving force 10 bring decision
In that respect then the i,su,
seems clearly loined As between th,
two candidates aud their isSpectiy,
schools. Mr.. Nilsson insists oa duinl
the job in tue hest light that the op
purtuuity affords Judge Hughes
would tot DO tbs loh until the lighl
is satisfactory and assured TIE NJ
s,ou is said L. h- score or even
uuudred years behind It's ,ontempn
rarles In many public aspects be
cause congress has Weighed the con
ilictiug slides ul a ques to1 nicely
and preferred To not act because th'
course Was not clear and iuCon u O
yertinle Numerous large matter
have been held over rar mans year
because ot differences ot opiuiou il
congress The president has not al
lowed tuese differences Iu preyeu
the taxing oI the step. even n ouh
imperiyCtly taken Judge Hughes. I
ais criticisms 1T the president are [,
De taEsn as = criterion, H9uld haNt
taken none az these steps hut ratue
have stool stprk still seeing that tht
steps actual, taken acre SUBJECT {,
controversial discussion /. seems
huSeyer that the country prefers ~
ttun tc iuactiuu. prugr -. 20 lnet u F.,
even al tie risk # making mistake
mara t.fsfH Mat 40 a.-TF, r..ttA