Seattle Mail and Herald, v. 4, no. 14, Feb. 16, 1901

              vc**.
^gajpj**>SJBJBJBJBaBBHBWBSVBaBSaaVBBM
Vol. IV
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON, FEBRUARY \6f J9W
No. J4
Seattle Mail and Herald
published Every Saturday at 306-307 Bailey
Bldg.     I'hone Main 488.
By The Mail Publishing; Co., Inc.
Edgar L. Hampton
Editor
- ,,.„„,„,,„.   I'rrs. B, W.  Way.  V.-P.
'" A    I,.  Lalrig, Sec and   I ri
UU'l'l'iV     KATES
TwelTS   Months,   $1.00.     Six   Months,   50c.
THE MAN WHO DID.
General Charles King, writing in
the Saturttdy Evening Post, uses his
priestly prerogative to inform us that
nothing Is wrong with the mill that
turns out United States army officers
al \v,.st Point, and that, therefore, it
should not be tho subject of censure
and public disapproval. In substantiation of his position he says that
hazing is also practiced in other
ols, which argument is certainly
of the tirst class, since we know that
hazing is practiced in other educational  institutions of the country.    In his
i finale, he attempts: to smooth
over the rutted feelings of the people
l,v declaring thai the pastime referred
to is simply a result of the overflow of
youthful energy, and that "hoys will
tx    hoys."     General   King   may   have
ons" for this kind of talk or he
may not. It is at least possible that
I, rty years of variegated life slipping
noiselessly over his head have done
much to dull the whilom keen edge of
l:is recollections of the time when
be; himself was a pleb,—and that the
al is not nearly so young as he
really thinks he is. At all events, he
has run his argument squarely against
the report of the congressional committee sent to investigate the Booz
hazing. Jf
This commitee dug extensively into
the ruins of the past at West Point,
and uncovered a graveyard of grue-
Bome facts. 1*hey found a multitude
of Ingenuous devices for student torture, and Innumerable cases where the
novice had been driven into convulsions or unconsciousness, or maimed
for life. The tolerance of a man who
has written so many pleasant, tiresome books on life at the Point, as
('apt. Charles King has. can be understood, for his weakness in that direction is apparent, but his puny de-
ver come with poor
grape.
He is right, however, in arguing that
ether institutions of "learning" are
not less excusable than his own fav-
cred academy. Such institutions
should be held more strictly responsible, at least by that very large class
ol logicians who place a Christian
minister's code of morals several
notches above the grocer's or butch-
< is. For the evident object of a military academy is to train man to be a
mild   sort  of an  educated  brute,  and
they do not always succeed in holding
him even within the bounds of this
curriculum, while the object of the literary schools is avowedly in the other direction.
Nevertheless, the fact remains that
the educational institutions of all the
"civilized" world persist in some form
of hazing.
In Germany it is oftenest the apish
customs of dueling with padded swords
which, however, were never known to
draw blood. The hardy Englishmen
are scarcely satisfied with this dainty
sort of fun, and the hardier American,
who goes raving mad in his desire
to be first in everything, both good and
bad; does not stop—as has been too
often demonstrated, short of actual
di struction of life.
One of the arguments against civilization—and there have come to be a
few arguments against it. whether serious or not we do not undertake to
say—is the fact that the boys whom
we have placed in college in order that
they may come forth to leatl American
thought and action onto higher planes,
Been to have developed only sufficient
breadth of mind to create a distaste
for honest labor, seem only to have
developed sufficient culture to enable
them to see social classes and lines
of destruction, seem only to have
gained sufficient cunning for mod-
t rn Shylocks, in shrewdness and exaction, and second American savages
ii.' method and variety of torture.
The knowledge that the students of
•ui' niidical colleges grow vicious over
the tlead bodies laid out on their dissecting tables, and tear tnem into
chunks, ami pelt the novice with these
dissevered feet, hands, livers, kidneys,
and other human organs till he faints
""in fright and nausea, is not an encouraging aspect of modern civilization?
Congress, however, has received the
report of. the Bpoz investigating committee and legislation is already on the
way. It is hoped that whatever measures are taken will be ample to cover all immediate needs.
SOME   ELABORATE   ROT.
Animated by the example of Mrs.
Nation, a group of Dowieite women
have wrecked a number of Chicago
drugstores. They believe the use of
drugs a greater evil than the use of
liquors, and therefore claimed the
same right to smash drug stores that
Mrs. Nation  nas to wreck joints.
Well, there is considerable ground
for their claim, for neither of the parties have any right" to smash either
joints or drugstores. But the Spokesman-Review takes up the question, and
makes a futile attempt to clinch an
argument.     It says:
'Here lies tin' mail) object to prohibition. It is the enterin.tr wedge againsi personal  liberty.    One element   says you  must
not use Illinois, however sparingly. Another would forbid the use of drills; another tobacco; another would smash your
billiard   table:   ami     >«*•     another     would
storm your house and smash the tables at
wliieli 'your gueStfl were playing euchre.
There is scarcely a limit to the possible
curtailment   of  Individual   freedom."
The Mail and Herald does not believe prohibition of the liquor traffic
practicable or possible, therefore it
does not advocate it. But the Spokesman Review has taken a ridiculous
attitude on the question. The Spokesman-Review's argument followed backward, would easily prove to us
that to apprehend the thief, the adulterer, the murderer also would be acting against  personal   liberty.
The Spokesman-Review will probably say that these above named
things are recognizer evils condemned
by law, and that is exactly the point.
So are the saloons of Topeka recognized evils condemned by law. Their
destruction would not be permitted
otherwise. The operation of drug-
is not contrary to law, and
their destruction could always be prohibited. The use of tobacco and cards
are not contrary to law, and
therefore could not possibly be
interfered with until such a time as
laws were passed placing them under
ban,—and such a time will probably
never  be.
As a matter of fact the will of the
people is still and should always be
the law of a country, and the law of
a country should always be respected
and enforced. There is no use for the
Spokesman-Review to attempt to complicate matters. The proposition is
very plain.
It is simply to enforce such laws
as a majority of the people are able
tc enact. It is not given to the
Spokesman-Review, or to any one individual or institution, to say how far
those laws shall  extend.
BAIT FOR "SUCKERS."
"Mr. r.yran Forgo! Lincoln Did So\
Mention His Name, but Talked Polities at
Columbus  Celebration.''
Such is a Post-Intelligencer headline concocted for "sucker" consumption. There are those in this dollar-
marked age. who, having themselves
forgotten Lincoln and abandoned the
principles for which he lived and died,
would like to have Mr. Bryan and other leaders of the people cease to remind them of their fall by reviving
the memories of the Martyred President. Had the "head-line editor" read
ols dispatch, he would have noticed
that Mr. Bryan was one of a half
dozen speakers assigned to answer
certain set "toasts." His subject was
"■b'fferson." The closing "toast" was
Lincoln," and the response was assigned to Hon. Charles A. Towne.
Mr. Bryan, with his usual tact and
unfailing regard for others, undoubtedly refrained from trenching upon
the subject assigned to another. It
is needless to say that both Mr. Bryan and Mr. Towne did their subjects
justice, and demonstrated—as Mr. Lincoln himself often asserted—that the
Democracy of Thomas Jefferson and
the Republicanism of Abraham Lincoln were one and the same thing.
But the opportunity to throw a fling
or cast a slur upon Mr. Bryan is too
tempting for partisan Republican papers to resist. For three months we
have been daily told that Mr. Bryan
was down and out. The hypocritical
talk about "re-organized Democracy"
has been coddled and petted into publicity under Republican nursing. If
these party editors believe Mr.
Bryan is "down," why take every op-
opportunity to slur and strike a fallen
foe? They convict themselves daily
either of cowardice or false statement
—and usually both.
The lady who told her friend the
past week that she relied more on the
opinion of the Seattle Mail and Herald than of any paper in the city, belongs to the majority, not the minority, of Seattle ladies, and it's good to
b<  in the majority:
The Times thinks that Charles M.
Sheldon. who recently preached
against Mrs. Nation, could get points
from the joint smasher that would
be of incalculable value to him in
carrying out his Christ-like newspaper schemes.
The spirit that prompted England
to prosecute the Catholics, and Quakers, is still a part of that government's
policy, judging from the fact that
King Edward VII has been compelled
to forswear the Catholic religion before he could lawfully inherit the English crown. The inconsistency of the
British government Is apparent. It
runs in the editor's mind that England
is making strident efforts to hold down
a certain nation in South Africa—partly because that nation refused certain
outsiders a privilege of voting, and
partly because they would not let a
Catholic confess his sins in the country. It is the same old Taxation without Representation, question still
alive under Edward VII.
A dozen of the wealthiest capitalists of the country are arranging to
tell the readers of the Saturday Evening Post how sorry they are that they
have the burden and responsibility of
wealth upon their shoulders. No
doubt, unless they are different from
those capitalists who have written on
such subjects hitherto, they will raise
a sad. old cry and try to create sympathy. They're all right, too. They
need sympathy. But not more than
the rest of us. The fact is that contentment doesn't depend either upon
wealth or poverty. It is the exclusive
property of the man who is enough a
philosopher and master of his own
mind to always do his best and
be satisfied with the results. A clean
liver and a good stomach also have to
do with it.