suppress the views of those who disbelieve in
them.
The truth of the matter is that you can not
logically say, “I am so devoted to American insti
tutions that I shall tolerate no criticism of them/
Ycu can not say it because the right of free dis
cussion is in itself the most fundamental of Ameri
can institutions. The Constitution, to which our
superpatriots are so fond of announcing their al -
legiance, carries in itself provisions not only for its
amendment but for its own complete dissolution.
The man who believes that no institution is above
criticism is himself halfway toward being a Bolshe
vist or a fascist. It is quite consistent for a com
munist to say that he will not tolerate outside
propaganda, because the communist believes in
dictatorship and in the suppression of rival
theories. It was the chief merit of the founders o,'
this country that they believed in the clash of
rival opinions and that they had sufficient con
fidence in the wisdom of the average man to be
lieve that in the long run truth would win.
It is impossible to spend a few hours walking
through the streets of Moscow without seeing
many startling things, many impressive things,
many magnificient things, and many hateful
things. The most hateful things to an American
ore the attempt to suppress individuality by mold
ing all mankind into a common form, and the sup
pression of liberty by preventing free speech and
free assembly and free criticism of the basis of the
communist system. It is Russia’s chief weakness
that she can not stand criticism; that she can not
afford to allow the news cf the outer world*to get
to her people. The conception which the average
Russian has of the rest of the world is even wilder
than the conception which we have of what is
going on in Russia. If in order to fight Russia we
must imitate her principle vices and her chief
weakness, then victory will have been purchased
at too high a price.
My own belief is:
First. That we can afford to meet Russian in
stitutions and Russian theories on the equal basis
of fair discussion and competition.
Second. That our own institutions and our own
economic and social theories will in this way prove
themselves superior^^theirs.
Third. That if r^hanistaken and if com
munism should prove its superiority in the open
market, it deserves to win out; and
Fourth. That by the clash of these rival
theories it is at least possible that some new social
order may arise superior in essence and in detail
to either one.
THERE IS A LAW
-x-•
Every once in a while we hear the mournful
piaint: “There should toe a law—” to cover some
particular or immediate fancied need.
There are myriads of laws. So many that
even the lawyers cannot keep track of them and
more are being ground in the legal grist mills
each year. And about ninety-nine per cent of
them have been termed “legal trash.”
We bring to mind one law. A law that is just
as real, just as fair and just today as when it was
first uttered: “Do unto others as you would they
should do unto you.”
mere nas oeen no law propounded in tne past
ages that is more human than this law. If more
people followed it, there would be less reason for
cluttering up the law books. Greedy exploitation
would be eliminated; the bread lines, the worries
and the cares of large metropolitan centres would
be eliminated.. And naturally similar problems of
the rural districts would become less.
“Do unto others as yen would they should do
unto you.”
Today the Alaskan official must ask: “If I
were as many of the Indians are;” “If I were as
many cf the Nordics are;” “If I were as most of
the fishermen are, what would I want done”?
Remembering that the old Indian law was
not different from the Mosaic—“An eye for an eye,
and a tooth for a tooth.”
We cannot understand the psychology of the
person, political whatnot, who slaps his constitu
ency with unjustly discriminatory laws, yet ex
pects that constituency to come right back with
the votes to put the discriminator back in office.
This little rule is made to work both ways. It
is not made to be forgotten by ten per cent of the
people and observed by the balance. We wish to
call the attention of our Federal office holders, of
the Territorial office holders, of the elective office
holders to this little rule of conduct. And we at
the same time serve notice that we expect those
who govern to use this rule.
X
A POOR TIME TO TRAP
It has been reported to us that already men
are going out to trapping grounds and setting
traps for fur-bearing animals. This is not only a
foolish thing to do, but it is wasteful.
It is wasteful because unprime pelts bring no
reward for the labor. We illustrate from a fur
sale held on the Sound last year: Six unprime
mink brought the shipper FIFTY CENTS. Who
in the world wants to skin even one mink for fif
ty cents?