had made a deliberate mis-statement as to the documents that were before him when he wrote the letter exonerating Ballinger.

Therefore, one instinctively inquires, Why the radical difference in the Taftian attitude toward the two cases? There is but one answer:

The campaign of 1912 is open and Taft wants a second term.

If Wickersham had any self-respect, he'd resign. After such a public snub, administered to him by the President, Wickersham's continued stay in the cabinet can mean nothing else than that the Sugar Trust has more dirty work for him to do.

And if Secretary Wilson and Solicitor McCabe do not voluntarily get out, Taft should kick them out.

IN the recent convention of Governors, a committee was appointed to go before the Supreme Court of the United States, and protest against the en. croachments of the lower Federal courts upon the reserved rights of the States. How silly! The Committee might as well protest against a politician's hunger for office. These life-term Federal judges have the power to extend their jurisdiction; and they wouldn't be human, if they did not abuse the power. What we really need is one Governor with back-bone enough to defy the usurpers. Had the Governor of Minnesota gone right ahead enforcing these intra-state rates which the Legislature had lawfully passed, what could Federal Judge Sanborn have done? Nothing.

Even now, the Governor of Minnesota could safely put these freight rates. into operation. It is not lawful for any court whatsoever to enjoin a State from being a State.

* * *

A State of this Union is a sovereign. ty in full possession of every sovereign power, excepting such portions thereof

as were surrendered to the Federal Government. The right to regulate commerce inside the State, was never surrendered. Consequently, each state has the completest sovereign right to regulate commerce within her borders. When an inferior Federal Judge virtually says to a State:

"I command you to quit being a sovereign; within your own borders, you shall not enforce your own laws; I forbid you the exercise of your police powers, and your right to fix tolls on your own public highways"—

the Governor should simply refuse to recognize the jurisdiction of the Federal judge.

The Eleventh Amendment to the Constitution was made for just such cases as that of the railroad companies against Nebraska.

A man named Chisholm, living in Alabama, entered suit in the lower Federal Court, against the State of Georgia. To the universal indignation of the States, the U. S. Supreme Court held that a state could be sued by a private citizen. This decision caused the states to adopt the Eleventh Amendment to the Federal Constitution. And not until after the Civil War, did any corporation dare to attempt to drag a sovereign State into the Federal Courts. Not until the bench had been packed with corporation lawyers, did the Federal judiciary venture to nullify the Eleventh Amendment.

The Judiciary Act of 1789 was that which framed the Federal Courts. One of the sections of the Act prescribes the manner in which the Constitutionality of State laws may be tested. The case must be brought in the State courts, carried to the Supreme Court of the State, thence to the Supreme Court, of the United States. Thus, the dignity of the State was respected, and uniformity of decisions assured.

That section of the Judiciary Act of 1789 is still the law of the land; but the lawyers who represent the States in these cases do not appear to be aware of it.

*

If we had one Governor with the nerve to call out the State troops, if necessary, to resist the officers of the Federal Court, when attempting to arrest the State officials for contempt of court-in not obeying the haughty mandate of the judge-we would never have any further trouble with these usurpatory judges. If I were Governor of Minnesota, I would put that new rate law into operation; and if Judge Sanborn sent marshals and deputy-marshals to arrest me, I would fling them into jail as fast as they came.

The Federal Government, (dearly as it loves the corporations) would never risk a war with a State, in behalf of the detested Federal judiciary, and the detested railroad corporations.

MR. HEARST, who claims credit for

pretty much everything, boasts "I killed cock-robin," in the case of Joe Bailey, of Texas. As usual, Mr. Hearst claims too much. Bailey's votes in the Senate were the cause of his downfall. He had weathered the storm of the Hearst exposures. Had he lined up with the Progressives, championed the cause of the tariff-cursed millions, fought the insatiable trusts with all the power that was in him, Texas would have forgotten the scandalous facts which were brought out by the Texas committee of investigation.

But, when Bailey began to vote against free raw materials, free lumber, free coal; when he passionately espoused the cause of Lorimer; when he voted against the Farmers' Free-List bill and the Underwood-La Follette wool bill-it was all over with the infatuated man. How he could fail to realize that

he was cutting his own throat, is hard to comprehend.

Better by far would his record be, had he allowed his resignation of last year to stand. Apparently, he was not his own master; apparently, the Standard Oil and its affiliated interests had power to work Bailey to the very last day of the extra session.

WHEN you lose confidence in your

employee, how much longer do you keep him? When you discover that the book-keeper, or the salesman, or the hired man, is dishonest, or incapable-when do you discharge him? At once, of course.

Why, then should we not retire from office a public servant who betrays his trust? Why should we not do this as soon as we can prove the betrayal?

In Switzerland, the people do that very thing. When an official goes wrong, he is "recalled." Those who voted him in, vote him out.

But President Taft says, with great

placed on these lands, by sworn wit

nesses before the Taft Commission, was $5,000,000; but Taft paid $7,000,000. Why?

Or was it in having his automobile hauled across the continent at public expense, in case he might need it on his way to San Francisco?

Was it when he committed the Government to the building and furnishing of religious edifices in Panama? Was it when he ordered, without Congressional authority, the widening of the canal itself?

Or was it when he strenuously contended that fabulous sums be spent in fortifying the canal, which would have been a harbinger of inexpensive peace, had our Government merely neutralized it, as the Suez canal is neutralized?

Was he studying economy, when he put the repudiated politicians, of both parties, on the pay-roll of the Government, to be stall-fed at the expense of the people?

Was he studying "economy and efficiency," when he put the Steel Trust millionaire Leischman, in the place of the accomplished Dr. Hill, as our Ambassador, at Berlin?

Was it economy he was studying, when he sent our army to the Mexican

border, at a cost of $2,000,000?

* * *

How long has it been since Mr. Taft was clamoring for an increase of the salaries of the Federal judges? How long since he worked for and secured more money for himself? How long since he had the White House completely refurbished at an expense of $50,000? How long since he took three vessels from our naval equipment, and converted them into pleasure yachts for the personal use of himself, his family, and the cabinet "set?"

Mr. Taft would be well advised if he ceased to make professions which his actions belie.

There is as much raw sugar in sight as there was at this time last year. There are 225,000 tons afloat now, coming from Hawaii and Java, due here Sept. 27th. Why then the doubling of the price? A corner on the available supply the vulgar, unlawful, inevitable device of the blood-suckers-is the

explanation. In other words, the Trust got a monopoly on raw sugar; and, de. fiant of law and Congressional committees, demanded all that the traffic would bear.

In June, the Brooklyn refinery of the Arbuckles was destroyed by fire. During June, July and August, none of their immense store of raw sugar could be refined. All of the dealers who had depended on the Arbuckles for sugar turned to the American company. whose business was hugely increased. Consequently, its supply of raw sugar was rapidly diminished. Thus, the destruction of their Brooklyn refinery, which caught them with an enormous quantity of cheap raw sugar on hand. turned out to the advantage of the Arbuckles. By accident, they had the only great store of raw sugar, immediatly available; and by combination with the American and Federal companies, they sent prices skyward.

Unfortunately, certain politicians and newspapers of the Democratic party were gulled (or pretended to be) by the specious statements of the criminal conspirators; and these Democrats have

GERMANY and France have not yet

come to terms regarding Morocco. In consequence of the possibility of war, the French banks are withdrawing their gold from Germany. It comes as a surprise to learn that the latter country is heavily in debt to the former. That France should have so complete.

ly recovered from the disaster of 1870, when her capital was occupied by conquering Germans; and when a huge war indemnity of a billion dollars was exacted by the relentless victors, is one of the marvels of modern history. Apparently, France has the men and the money, ready for war, while Germany, having the men, is without the money. The fantastic Kaiser has blustered, as usual, but the French diplomats and cabinet officers have manifested perfect

coolness and resolution.

Nobody can tell what is the real effectiveness of either army, German or French. The war machine which Von Moltke operated was perfect. The Germans of 1870 were prepared, in every respect; and the two wars the one with Denmark and the other with Austria-had seasoned the troops and given practical experience to the officers.

On the contrary, the rottenness of the Second Empire had gangreened the entire military system of the French.

Soldiers were sent to the battle line who did not know how to use the new rifles. In some cases, the gun barrels would be at one depot and the plungers at another. In other cases, the wheels of the commissariat wagons would be in one place and the frame-work and bodies somewhere else.

Vast accumulations of food were stored so blunderingly that the soldiers went hungry in the midst of plenty. The ammunition was inferior; and the

timate and the actual number of soldiers was of itself sufficient to wreck

every calculation as to results of the

clash of the two nations. Besides, the officers were not supplied with maps of France. Maps of Germany were furnished, for it was to be an "On to Berlin" campaign. The officers and soldiers of France fought with the utmost heroism, but they had no chance. It is

different now.

THE Russian Premier, Stolypin, has

been assassinated. The motive was political. With all the barbarism of Ivan the Terrible, Stolypin has crushed every "disorder" throughout the Empire. By "disorder," such despots as the Russian Premier meant uprisings in favor of Democracy. He has shed blood like water in the effort to drive the people back into medieval submission to the "Divine Right" of Kings.

IN Mr. Taft's speech at Detroit, he cut out the following paragraph

"I am glad to be able to add that if Congress shall continue needed appropriations, every trust of any size that violates the statute, before the end of this Administration in 1913, will be brought into court and acquiest in a decree of disintegration by which competition between its parts shall be restored and preserved under the persuasive and restrictive influence of a permanent and continuing injunction.”

Why did he cut it out? Because Wall Street did not like it, and wired him to that effect. In talking to “the farmers," Mr. Taft is acting the comedian in a worn-out farce.

wording of the Statute, from "any combination in restraint of trade," to "any unreasonable combination in restraint of trade." The viciousness of this Jesuit decision is, that the Federal judges are made the arbiters of what constitutes an "unreasonable" restraint of trade. The had no such power under the Sherman law. Congress never entrusted them with it; the Supreme Court legislated it to them.

As Mr. Taft's challenge is not to Bryan only, but to all others, I will take it

up.

The Shipping Trust, of New York, was before the Federal courts some weeks after Jesuit White had announced his decision; and the Shipping Trust got off, scot free, because the Federal judge held that its combination in restraint of trade was not "unreasonable."

If Mr. Bryan has forgotten the case, I hope that one of our readers will jog his memory.

THE Virginia courtesan, Beulah Bin

ford, was not wanted in New York. Not even her pictures could be tolerated.

The European courtesan, Gaby Deslys, was very much wanted in New York; and her lewd face appears pictured in all the papers.

The Binford had no money; the Deslys had oodles of it; besides, jewels that a sap-headed King gave her.

The morals of New York, like its politics, are never understood by outsiders.

As to the morals, however, it appears that the having, or not having, of money is the criterion.

THE latest from the France-Germany

tangle is, that Morgan and Rothschild dictated terms to the fantastic Kaiser.

France, England and Russia acted in concert to withdraw gold from Ger

many. This threw the country into a panicky condition. Instead of issuing fiat paper money, as England did during the Napoleonic wars, the silly Kaiser issued treasury notes, redeemable in gold on a certain day. (Monday, Sept. 18, 1911.) This was a fearful mistake. It put Germany at the mercy of private bankers who had the gold. That's where Morgan and Rockefeller got their opportunity to dictate. Cable dispatches assert that the German Government virtually went on its knees to these private bankers, and that J. P. Morgan fixed the time limit for the acceptance by Germany of France's terms.

Dear me! It hasn't been six months, either, since Morgan was presenting to the Kaiser that Martin Luther letter. as a token of Morgan's profound regard for him, the said Kaiser!

THERE has been rioting in the streets

of Vienna, Austria, because of the high price of food. Troops were called out; the people were fired upon, and many killed or wounded.

Spain is rocking with agitation, and the throne is in peril. When a Kinglet, like the decadent Alfonso, openly associates with actresses of evil repute, and disappears from public view in the company of a paramour, it is not to be wondered at that such a throne is in danger. Recently he plunged the whole of officialdom into consternation by being lost from sight for a day and night. He turned up, laughing at his adventure, and the dismay it had caused. His companion in seclusion was a notorious actress who had been starring at San Sebastian.

R. TAFT'S speeches in advocacy

of partial free trade with Canada had the effect of defeating reciprocity. The Canadians believed that our President told the truth when he declared that the treaty was wholly beneficial to the United States, and altogether detri