OCR Text |
Show HOPKINS HAS A TIGHT ON. W'c notice in a dispatch from Springfield, Spring-field, 111., opening the campaign for tho next Scnatorship from that Stale, that Senator Albert J. Hopkins, noto- I rious as a Mormon champion in tho Senate, desires to succeed himself. Against that dosiro ox-Scnator "Rilh" Mason will contend, and has taken tho field announcing his candidncy. Mr. Mason will make tho Mormon record of Mr. Hopkins a live, issue in the campaign. cam-paign. Tt will bo remembered that Senator Hopkins mado a speech in favor of Smoot. This speech was said to be a "clear legal argument" in support of Smool's right to tho Senatorial seat. As a matter of fact, it wan not a "legal argument" at all; it was merely put forward as an excuse for Senator Hopkins's purpose to vote to sustain Smoot as a partisan proposition, and because President Roosevelt said that this should bo dono ns a Republican party measure. There was not one speech in favor of Smoot that was entitled en-titled to tho least consideration as a "legal argument." They wcro all merely in the nature of sneaks in the hope of avoiding the just condemnation condemna-tion of a virtuous public, which ro-coilcd ro-coilcd nt Mormon church representation in tho United States Senate. Every one of the intelligent Senators who voted for Smoot know that he was doing an opprobrious act; ho knew there was a certain plausibility in such self-styled " legal arguments" as he might make; but ho also knew that tho "legal arguments" in no wiso wont to the marrow of the case. The citation cita-tion of constitution, of statute, of precedent, pre-cedent, wero mado by tho Senators who made them, merely as a cloak or screen behind which they .could do that which they themselves know to be a dirty, partisan act nud thus carry out an odious political job. They salved their consciences far more on tho proposition proposi-tion that their vote for Smoot was supposed sup-posed to benefit; the Bopublican party than through any reason in tho law .or constitution, or based upon Senatorial Sena-torial precedents. Mr. Mason is a better lawyer, ns a matter of fact, than is Mr. Hopkins. He is unquestionably ready to . meet Senator Hopkins before' the "peoplfc in the campaign which is to come for the filling of tho 'Hopkins seat after tho present; term expires, on the so-called legal propositions that favored Smoot. If Senator Hopkins thinks he can go before the people of Illinois and do-ccivo do-ccivo them with any rubbishy talk nbout law, constitution, and precedent that has, in fact, no application to tho caso, he will bo very much deceived, for Mr. Mason will bo fully able to Hhow precisely what we havo stated before, that not ono of the speeches claiming to be "legal arguments" in the Smoot caec was cither a "legal argument" applicable to that caso or was intendod to be, but was merely an excuse under covor of which a filth', partisan job could bo carried out. Unquestionably Sonator Hopkins hoped that the Smoot caso would be dropped after Smoot was soatod. Undoubtedly, Un-doubtedly, also, Chief Justice Tuncy of tho. United States Supremo Court thought tho Drcd-Scott case would be dropped after it -was decided by the court; but the lesson of American political poli-tical life is that no case is ever dropped until it is properly adjusted, and no principle is settled until it is settled right. The Springfield dispatch referred to states that the people of Illinois know something about, the Mormon question and the lawlessness of tho Mormon leaders. It states a clear fact, when it says that l.hoy will not bo ablo to sco what tho constitution had to do with tho caso; that tho lawless Mormon leadership "is a hideous institution;" and the good people of Illinois think that it is an outrage to allow a representative repre-sentative of that institution to sit in the United States Senato. It is a clear case thai Senator Hopkins is likely to reap (lo him) an unwelcomo reward re-ward for his vicious cnurso in the Smoot case. Mr. Mason in his cam-pnign cam-pnign will not let it drop; he will pin Mr. Hopkins right down to that caso throughout the campaign. And when Mr. Hopkins undertakes to convince l.ho people of Illinois that ho was guided guid-ed by law, constitution, and precedent, in place of being a party to an unclenn political bargain and sale, ho will hnvo a hard row to hoc. "Vc certainly hope that. Mr. Hopkins may be defented; for in this Smoot case he was an actor in a drama that is alike disreputable, scandalous, and insulting to tho whole American people. |