The Marietta journal and courier. (Marietta, Ga.) 1909-1918, 1917-07-06
GOV. BROWN WRITES
ABOUT CONSUMPTION

written letter Co the Atlanta Con-
stitutien relative to the dispute over
the new CONSUMPTION law that has
met with such universal satisfaction
that we are reproducing it for the
benefit of our readers. 1t is as fol-
lows:
Editor Constitution:
II have noted with great regret the
disposition of many of our pro-war
advocates to intolerantly condemn
those of our fellow citizens who ques-
ton the constitutionality of the law
enacted by congress requiring regis
traitor of all of our men between the
ages of 81 and 81 years and provid-
ing for a selective draft of an army
which it is openly stated will be sent
to France to fight the German gov
ernment's armies. So wrought up
are those pro-war zealots that they
are proclaiming all those who ex-
press the doubt referred to as trait
ors," etc.
"Now, let me state unequivocally
that | favor the war by our country
against the German kaiser and all his
co-conspirators and co-assassins. He
and they have not hesitated to lie
unscrupulously and brazenly, to de-
stroy ruthlessly and villainously, and
to murder in a manner so atrocious
and indiscriminate as to shame the
veriest barbarian of Africa or abort
ginal America.
And let me state also that | am
in favor of hunting out and chasing
down that horde of self-created dem
ons and crushing them beyond resur-
rection, regardless of whether that
course takes our fleets into all the
seas and our armies into any field
of battle in Europe, Asia or Africa.
In other words, l believe that when
we get into war we, must leave our
enemy no arena of safety We must
strike him wherever we can find
him.
Furthermore, have no doubt but
that the supreme court of the United
States, if the test be made, will up
hold the constitutionality of the re-
Gently enacted law to which | have
referred. But l will add>that l have
been surprised to note the number of
people with whom / have talked who
doubt the onstitutionality of the
law
Wherefore, then is the justifica-
ton for the intolerance with which
those of our fellow citizens who
doubt are condemned? Why are they
not entitled to their opinion, and to
have their day in COURT just as much
as we who believe in sending an ar
i, my to France; yea, who hope that
army will aid our allies in leveling in
ruins, by cannon~or bombs from air
planes, if needs be, every city and
other human abiding place in Ger
many, asa penalty upon her people
for unfolding their government in
its career of diabolical crime?
Confidence in Supreme Court.
THE American people, practically
without division-save one element
which within the past few years has
been eXertng certain activities-ac-
cept without question the decisions
OF the supreme court of our republic.
80 exalted is the worldwide conf
dence in its wisdom, integrity and
fairness, that, thirty years ago, one
of the greatest nations of Europe Sc
lected two justices of our supreme
court for its arbitrator in a dispute
1T had with a South American power.
to which dispute the United States
had practically made itself a party
with the South American country in
question. In other words, Great Bri
tain virtually said to the government
of the United States: Il will put in
the hands of justices of your supreme
court the decision of the DISPUTE
have with Venezuela, with whom YOU
have joined yourself And it COM
mands commingled admiration and
humor when we reflect that Great
Britain won almost all she had claim
ed, IN the award given.
Now, if our congress has enacted
law which our own supreme court
would declare unconstitutional it has
done very wrong thing; and this
decision should be given, and we
should adjust our conduct of the war
to 1t. 1t is useless to deny that the
patriotism of the American peonle
would find lawful way to work out
the problem successfully. If, on the
contrary, the supreme court would
hold-and firmly believe it would
so hold-that the law in question is
constitutional, our people, almost as a
unit, would accent the daciSiop 49,