The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1922-07-03

-sr THE SUPREME COURT VS.. LEGAL IGNORANCE.
Exception the
20 Coronado been noted
nsyby Of the News
being reprinted full hereafter
- because not
agree the
very perpiexing puzzing 1t is difficult
10 see the how
the Supreme its decisions.
belief that the decision
Of court founded # neither
just constitutional doing accepted
Of decision nearly
onehah Of the supreme Court itsefthe minority Of the
This minority expressed by the
Therefore the Journal with Of the
- court
The members Of the minority
4 : times other opinions
- in this instances is entitled
70 just as m respect majority side
the Journal chooses give respect to
the minority sides opinion i falls to see where It
legal ignorance except that the 81 Andrews news would can
minority the Supreme Court ignoramuses
II the are Legal irnoramusss ii this case what srehey
which they to be the majority
I sdeg
Are they stm legally ignorant2
~ legally ignorant all the time
Supreme Court 10 divided
minority displayed its legal
minority opinion then the Journal win admit
ignorance. viii admit shame for sodoinE
In fact :. claims TO Be in fairly good company
upon first thought the next proposition is-
noted the ST. Andrews News
responsible for the acts
unions Of the members of such local
reasoning that such conclusion
federal government be held resDon
be the ynching Of citizen by other citizens Of any
The St Andrews News points out II 5
United States responsible for the ynhins Of
people by the fact that the
states be held in such damages is too well known
- moderately educated people TO need comment
That e. moderately wen Uniformed" people might know
his WIKI fs yyha the
education" having anything to do with IT,
There undoubtedly thousands Of moderately and even
anything that they educated
necessarily implying that they keep up or have 20
sorming by mob Of parish prison. to which Il
probable the St News refers and that the
states paid the Of Italy damages the
Hnchngs.
what moderately educated. moderately"
formed does not know possibly overlooked, Is
the question United
because 81 the international" character Of the affair
The citizens Hnched subjects Of foreign"
And tn. u reserves the right or has been given the
right explicit by
exclusively conduct all negotiations
etc with foreign countries which it necessary to have
Quoted for in behalf or In defense ofhe y g.
N--~Ue-
The U federal is the legally constitute
tho various conduct OF
busnsss the business Of Of the states with
No state Of union is allowed any negotis-
any foreign country
direct i is was the U s.. and
not the state in whhths ynehings occurred that paid the
But It Is international
such authority agent state. all Of
states. has been delegated to the u. s.
No state has delegated attempted to delegate
federal government liability any
purely domestic character.
II state did wish TO delegate authority.
federal would ii.
states would allow such shifting Of responsibility.
The why this IL and why the u.
delegated agent in all
acter. be known to moderately wen 'gnformed
ana become obvious to any moderately edu-
Gated" person. upon sufficient explanationl
In drawing Ste pArellei between the responsibility
government Iynchngs other state
the responsibility Of major unions for the conduct Of
subordinate unions their members the
domestic problem affecting
only federal government
Therefore
TO international discussing
no Of the Journal e n point
But the fact that the point Is brought however mis-
happy misadventure after all the
nation takes clear It and bring the commentator
back the bywny into which had strayed.
plainly point the made by the Journal ana