The Morning Tulsa daily world. [volume] (Tulsa, Okla.) 1919-1927, 1922-04-12
AN AWNING DOCTRINE.

NN AWNING DOCTRINE
The duatrua ouuu,arld by Doctor Abel
from tho pulpit sunday aud later nmpuucd lo
an authorized Interview for this paper H so
amazing chat vo cannot permit 90 90 ro un-
challenged
This doctrine basrg r That oo.o u, h1p
boon enacted it should bo eubs,r.lcnry accept.
"a and supported regardless ~ the conso-
qucnccs ot that law. criticism of th' nw should
cease and no effort bo made 20 ou,roo,o Ura
Injustice, or remove ~ defects
Tho minister was referring io tho prohibition
law In general and 'nc volstoad not In rarDlnu-
lar, hat tho doctrine hc cot out n acceptable OF
an. must be acceptable from the standpoint or
political economy I'm general not with reference
to any particular subject or case.
no quote the speaker exactly "a question ie
open up 10 tho time 20 ls submitted 90 popular
vote. but after the people have spoken and tho
law hns hcon made n man has mo- moro right
% nunul or TO offset 70 than a prisoner hu 10
refuse on personal grounds Goo accept or fuln'l
a Judges decision"
In examining This remarkable statement lct
us ignore tho fnct that tho law referred to was
never submittcd 20 popular vote. and consider
only tho incongruous fols,ry Of the whole struc-
turc, Av1illng ourselves OF the doctors prIn-
cpo we instantly point ont that In scoknE
either tho Eighteenth amendment or the Vol.
stead net he violated every tenet he has just sct
up Tho constitution whom adopted marked the
end OF all "opcn question" concerning tho
rights OF the states to exclusive control Of an
police questions. ana tho liquor question ls
purely police question.
The forces seeking the Eighteenth amend
mcnt moved directly In tho face OF the then cx-
iatlng law, tore down one Of the bulwarks OF tho
constitution and set up constitutional amend
mont Justifying their action. who will deny
this? Here Ia a precise instance of one dccl-
sion OF a majority being ovcrrIddcn or reversed
by another decision OF majority.
Is there anything cupablc, therefore. IN open
discussion Of this last decision by those who
feel very kcenly that ground has been lost in
stead OF gained by H. measured from tho
standpoint OF cvll liberty ana the general pub
Ic INTEREST,"
But let us look into tho matter further No
citizen has right to crltlclso or oppose any
law enunclatcd by tho tribunals OF government
says the wcl meaning minister. This is rather
a far cry from that other concoh. that law
once made should be enforced uutn It IL re-
pcalcd. hitherto tho acceptable doctrine OF mi-
norlucs seeking to control moIorlucs This doe
trlne allowed the proprlcty OF opcn discussion
and even organized effort TO bring about rc-
peal, but tho Abel doctrine denies that; 81 would
have the cItlzcn accept uncompaInIngly any
thing promulgated by government; would deny
him even the constitutional right ~ seeking TO
repeal through constitutional means
Had such n doctrine controlled humanity We
would still be- subjects OF England No. we
would be much further back than that; We
would ho scrfs fcxlng the knee to some foudol
lord ana bcsccchlns him 20 permit as TO 1.-Two
and move ana have a hclngl Monstrousl
Possibly Doctor Abel has mover read the dc
tailed history Of his own country prior 10 tho
Civil war We recommend that ne read care
fully the notorious decision OF Chief Justice
Tancy OF the United states supreme court in tho
celebrated Drcd Scott caso. Here was the very
last word OF government on an ISSUE OF vast
national import.
Yet tho republican party boldly challenged
that decision refused TO be bound by Il, re-
fused TO accept It as constitutional and s"t
afoot a movement which was championed hy
tho greatest authority on sound government of
his day. Abraham Lincoln. and costly war was
fought to bring about the repeal OF that ulu-
matum Of government
Had tho Abel doctrine been IN vogue I'm those
days thcro would have been no war slavery
would now flourish IN every section OF the re-
public aud tho sayc-holdlnE oligarchy would
he supreme. More than this, had the Abel doc
trlno been ln vogue In tho last third ot the
eighteenth century there would have been no
Boston tea rarty, no War of tho Revolution,
In a republic such os tho United states OF
America, the right OF citizens 10 or emily discuss
any political question or issue never ceases Nor
does the right to criticize and oppose through
.npatItutlOugl means pyrr CuI Irrga -rD,lh and