Year: 1879

THE OBNOXIOUS PISTOL DE- UISION OF OUR SUPREME COURT.

 It would seem from what our good friend across the river, Dr. Mcclure, of the Arkansian, has seen proper to say about our article concerning the recent decision of the Supreme Court in relation to carrying pistols, that we have committed an unpar- donable crime in daring to express an opinion as to that matter. And then, good soul that he is, goes of into long peroration upon the ma ny virtues, good qualities and noble traits of E, H. English, just as though that distinguished gentleman stood in need of vindication at his hands. If there IS man in the State who questions the honor, vir- tue, morality, goodness of heart and nobility ofcharacter, of that distin- guished citizen, we have never heard of it; and we want it distinctly un- derstood, that in saying what we have already said, or may hereafter say, in objection to the recent pistol decision, We have never for a mo- ment entertained thought of de- tracting from the high esteem in which k. H. English, as man and a citizen, is held by the entire people of our State, We are surprised that man ofDr. McGuire's experience and age, cannot make the proper distinction between a legitimate crit icism upon the official act of public servant, and personal attack upon his individual character.

 Whether a man fills the office of township constable, or sits upon the bench of the Supreme Court, we have always labored under the i'm pression that his official acts belong ed to the public, and that the free dom of the press gave us the right to review such acts of our public ser wants. This view of the case may be delusion of ours, however; and it may be because man is good fellow,-has a good heart; is honest; is virtuous; is genial and companion able; holds an office high above the common herd-it may be that on ac- count of some one, or all, of these reasons, the people or the press has no right to question the official ac- tion of such an one. It may be that a man may get so good, so noble, so high up in office, that he becomes infallible and unaccountable to his constituency. And it may be that an humble editor, component part of free press, has no right to read decision of Supreme Court and form an opinion thereof. Or, if he does form an opinion it may be that he has no right to express it, espec- ially if 1t should not be favorable. It may be the duty of an editor to al ways write articles of laudatlon and praise, and never to dare to criticise the acts of big officials. We say this MAY be the true idea, but we don't believe it, and do not intend so to act.

 pr. Mcclure approves the decis- ion of the Supreme Court. Here is his reason for approving 1t;

 The right to bear arms, such as weapons of war, is guaranteed to every American citizen by the high est authority in the land, and God forbid the day, when that right shall be abridged or set at naught. Ma vy-sixes' are wer weapons, such as cannot be concealed and come within the law of our State, and the Su- preme Court could do no less than so decide, without overriding the higher law the court was sworn to support, regardless of their wishes feelings, or the opinion of one horse lawyers, newspapers, or populace.

 And the good Dr., the good soul that he is, gives the editors of the Immigrant and DEMOCRAT this piece of gentle advice.

 Oar brethren had better study the constitution of the United States and of the state, the bill of rights, and the various clauses and provisions ol law covering the. question they tack, le.

 Acting upon this suggestion, we have gone to the Consultation of the