Newspaper Page Text
TRUTH--JUSTICE
ATLANTAS i GEORG!
e X LANING K SPRVASRTN L) OF TWR SOUTHRAS &
e i i et ot ettty
Text for the Dav
Por if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted ae
cording to that a man hath, and not according to that
he hath not—ll Corinthians, Vlll :12~Text today by
the'Rev. Chas. W. Daniel, Pastor ¥irst Baptist Church.
a—————
REVOLUTION IN THE UNITED
STATES SUPREME COURT
BARE majority of those judges sitting on the
Acam, but a minority of the full court, have de
cided against the government in its suit to dis
solve the United States §tnl Corporation ag a trust
existing in violation of the Sherman anti-trust law.
The Georgian believes that combinations should be
permitted by law and controlled by government, and so
the fact that these four judges have decided the case
in favor of the steel company is not so important as
the ground upon which the decision is based and the
language of the decision.
The reasonning in this decision makes it one of thé,
most extraordinary and unjudicial and revolutionary
decisions ever rendered by an American or any other
court.
The reasoning of the opinion is simply an elabora
tion of the decision that the court will not declare the
steel company to have violated the Sherman anti-trust
law because, in the judgment of these four judges,
it would be contrary t’the public interest to dissolve
the steel company.
That is what makes it extraordinary, unjudicial
and revolutionary.
Any ordinary lawyer who reads the decision will
appreciate its character without discussion. It is so
clearly unjudicial and revolutionary that we assume
that these four judges meant it to have just that
charscter.
To us it seems clear that these judges intended to
take advantage of what, upon the surface of things,
seems to he the reactionary spirit of today—a changed
gpirit which started with President Wilson’s great
apostasy to liberal America, the backbone of his sup
port, and without which he would have been as
helpless in America as he proved to be in Paris.
It is an attempt by judicial decision 6 settle a
great economic controversy which has been waged In
this country and in Europe for more than a genera
thon,
To the ordinary oltizen this steel companies de
cision may not seem at first blush as extraordinary
and revolutionary as it will to the lawyer. But if the
citizen gives it a moment's thought he will appre
cinte the dangerous character of the deaision to our
institutions.
1f any citizen who ig in doubt whether or not we
are correct in making this serious criticism will recall
a few fundamental conceptions of American princi
ples of government he will see what the decision
means and why it is revelutionary.
First, and most fundamental, and most character
istically American, is the American principle of the
geparation of powers. We carry thls doctrine so
much farther than any other nation that we have
been called its originator.
We divide the powers of our national government
into three distinct and separate parts, to which we
distinctly and clearly assign certain separate and
exclusive functions.
The representatives of the p?nple In Congress
assembled can make laws only in accordance with the
Constitution of the United States. But, as long as
Congress stays within the express provisions of the
Constitution, it may make whatever laws it pleases.
The President can veto a law, but that means only
that Congress must think twice, because Congress can
by a two-thirds vote immediately pass any law over a
President’s veto.
The Supreme Court can interpret a law only in
‘mecordance with the express provisions of the Consti
tution and the intent of the Congress. ’
. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land,
Oongress sometimes passes a law at variance with
that supreme law.
! Whereupon the Supreme Court can and does de
selare such a law unconstitutional; and Congress must
_yvevoke the law in accordance with the Constitution.
: Congress sometimes passes a law which is not
‘@lear in its provisions, where the intention of Con
. gress is not plain, where there is a possible misunder
standing of what the law actually means,
Whereupon the Supreme Court c¢an and does in
terpret such a law and gives its opinion as to what
Congress actually meant, and its opinion is final un
less Congress repasses the law, stating in more clear
and more definite language, exactly what it does mean,
In all cases, therefore, the representatives of the
people, in Congress assembled, have the unquestionable
right to determine what the laws of the country shall
be, and the only opportunity for the Supreme Court to
interfere is through lack of clearness of expression in
the laws or lack of compliance with the Constithtion.
Now, there is no lack of clearness of expression in
the Sherman anti-trust law. The meaning of the law
i 8 plain. The intent of Congress is unquestionable
and is not questioned in this steel trust decision,
Furthermore, there is no lack of compliance with
the Constitution. The constitutiopality of the Sher
man anti-trust law is unquestionable and is not ques
tioned in this decision,
The Supreme Court does not attempt to say that
the Sherman law violates the Constitution or falls to
express the intent of Congress, the only grounds on
which the court could fail to enforce it
The Supreme Court arrogates to itself a new
power-—the right to decide whether or not a law con
stitutionally passed by Congress is the kind of a law
the people ought to have,
This arrogated power is a grave infraction of the
Constitution, which definitely limits the powers of
the Supreme Court, and it is a vielent invasion of the
rights of the representatives of the people in Congress
to make the laws and to determine what laws the
people want and need.
Such dn infraction of the Constitution and Inva
slon of the rights of a co-ordinate branch of govern
ment is definitely and distinetly revolutionary.
To repudiate the Constitution is revolution, whether
that, assault upon the Constitution and government
cmes from above or below.
L Revolution in the direction of reaction is no less
THURSDAY—Editorial Page of The Atlanta Georgian—MAßCHll, 1920
: WHAT THE ANCIENTS MIGHT TEACH US.
An FEnglish physician, Dr. L. W. Sambon, main
tains that the vaunted superiority of modern man
has limitations. The ancients were indeed, he says,
our betters in sanitation and hygiene; they under
stood and practised drainage as well as we; kept
sacred cats and snakes to kill the rats which they
knew caused.the plague; protected the beetles that
killed the hookworm; protected the ibis because it
ate the snails that carried the parasites that caused
dysentery and haematuria; used oils and smudges
to keep off the blood-sucking night insects; and in
numerous other ways guarded themselves effec
tively against diseases, although they knew less
than we about the original cause and detailed
working of the organisms that cause disease. They
even planted successful colonies in tropical regions
where we have failed,
Of course, modern scientific progress is not dis
credited by these facts. But they do show that
common senge wasn't invented the day before yes
terday.
That {8 consoling, for what was learned the
day before yesterday might be forgotten the day
after tomorrrow.
dangerous to liberty and no less revolution than rev
olution in the direction of radicalism.
Moreover, there has been only talk of revolution
in the direction of radicalism, while here is the very
act of revolution in the direction of reaction, limiting
the liberties of the nation and invading the rights of
the people and their representatives in Congress.
We must remember, too, that of all revolution of
reaction. that of the Supreme Court is the most dan
gerous and the most difficult to correct, because the
Supreme Court is an appointive body and not an
elective body, and 1s therefore not responsible to the
people nor under the direct discipline of public dis
approval.
The personnel of the Supreme Court is largely in
the hands of the President, and therefore when both
'the President and the Supreme Court develop startling
revolutionary tendencles to defy the Constitution, in
vade the rights of (‘ongress, and impose their indiyid
nal will and opinions upon the people of the United
States, without regard to the restrictions clearly im
posed by the supreme law of the land, we have an
actual state of revolution at hand and accomplished.
It would behoove the people of this free America,
if they wish to preserve their freedom, to concern
themselves actively and aggressively with the state of
revolution which actually exists, and to give less heed
to the discussion of the possibilities of radical revolu
tion which is nowhere in evidence and certainly nat
in operation.
In order to stop reactionary revolution, restore the
Ilherties of the people, re-establish respeet for the
Constitution, and revive the proper powers and limi
tations of power of the various co-ordinate branches
of the government, it is necessary for the people to
unite and assert themselves at the polls, regardless of
party, and to put into operation the necessary laws
and constitutional amendments which make the Presi
dent and the courts directly responsible to the people
themselves, and which will deprive the President and
the courts of some of the powers which they now
abuse, to the menace of free government.
The main measures necessary for accomplishing
this task are:
(1) To nominate for the presidency by direct nom
ination and to elect by popular vote.
(2) To elect the cabinet officers and make them re
sponsible to Congress.
(3) To deprive the President of the power of pat
ronage; to put all public offices as nearly as possible
under civil service, and have nppointmongl made by a
committee of Congress.
(4) To elect federal judges, including the Supreme
Court justices, by popular vote,
(5) To apply the initiative, the referendum and the
recall to national matters,
If neither cne of the old parties will undertake
this task, a new party should be formed to accom
plish it, as it is the most patriotic and most essential
task that can be performed for the liberty and safety
of the American people.
“Wilson's eampalgn Issuve 18 to bhe ‘TLeagzue or No
Teague,'” says a contemporary. There have been hrave
men since Agamamnon: the Light Brigade found even
so much as half a league onward pretty rough going
—largely, too, because “some one had blundered.”
1f we ean catch time between hikes hither and yon,
we propose asking our ouija board, confidentially,
what the Sam Hill an arbitration agreement amounts
to, anyway, If anything? -
Pedestrians may find the going easier and happier
by repeating to themselves as they journey that well
known refrain, “Punch, punch, punch with care, punch
in the presence of the passen-jare!"” Then, again, they
may not. .
Letters From the People
AS TO MR. ANDERSON., :
Editor The Georgian: N
Whether or not Mr. Willam H. Anderson, New
York superintendent of the Anti-Saloon League, is an
idiot or pest is a question, raised by Mr. Anderson
himself, which tfiny be considered without the slight
est reference to the merits of prohibition. ‘
It would be difficult to find a preacher of any de
nomination who has not always been opposed to the
saloon. It now appears that quite a number of preach
ers are also opposed to Mr. Anderson and his meth
ods.
The speafacle of Mr. Anderson standing in the
New York State Assembly, notebook in hand and con
spicuously recording the vote of each member, pro
and con, is sufficiently unseemly to raise a doubt in
intelligent minds as to just what kind of a person he
{s. The official record of a roll call in the Assembly
is at the disposal of every citizen.
When, in addition, Mr. Anderson undertakes a
nw«\eplng‘ arraignment and condemnation of any
church as an enemy of American welfare, the last
doubt concerning Mr. Anderson is dispelled. He has
ceased to be useful. The saloon has gone forever
from American life.
For whatever Mr, Anderson has donea in the past
in removing this evil, let him receive due thanks from
all moral people, but let him not continue in a posi
tion where his arrogance, insolence and bigotry jeop
ardize the great cause which he at present, at least,
so dully misrepresents. PROHIBITIONIST.
Atlanta.
What Have We Done for Our Soldiers?
ReTR TR T "‘,‘l i!
A I ” N V"?;”Ei.'::‘*’*'f‘wl g“W .EU'ingmhr 0
““lmflilll'u‘.u,,.l‘l‘} I Jl"a W3l ?‘,’{lflmfiqmilrir?s;fw‘lffz‘%zfu??v!!eii‘d;"Ngaw,u.xwl,;M; 5
RAR I | eAR /
i N W —wme woprowan —_—— J}
L =e s N
e APPRECTION Ao 0
i m:{fi;%.s.sgt;g EREAT WAR Tfafffiff“ ‘lfia" 1 ,/,
! es % m:’//"z/’f/'—:‘/i\\\\ Y ; i
’l: ~‘f;ffiififi ?x :::wrr MAKE? MH:T‘I\?ES | // /
V—= RTR [ e FeEL / 44
== N'% CHEAP! s
= = e R O ‘ a 1
— N i
e il N “ 1 // |
= o Mk? // %@g |
T BN / / e
.e \ , A ) //\
C ESERNE A a I / Sl
BN Uk U e“'
OV R ff // L
o | e == VS il
e IR ' ///
!:w:r‘se‘fw e e
T;\ e S / / l
geaar WW e ___// i anehl
i g '()/ }}l A “W//////////// —_— / //// s
i(I \(\«/////////\////Z///////f/////////////// e |
e e "”““‘\mmm\\:.?/\““ =
“f‘qgm“;‘ TSR R ,"/4\(fl§ mu hfl |
Al o L
?"%i;f““’x“w‘ B ‘.’flfi L
RAy RR AR : ;
Neighborhood
Comment
BEATING THE GAME.
(Augusta Chronicle.)
Let's suppose that in 1914 you
took out a SI,OOO insurance policy
on your life for the protection of
your wife and child, in case you
died,
Let's suppose you have died in
1920~a rather unpleasant thought
—and that the principal is paid to
yvour wife and you have been safe
ly buried.
The SI,OOO that the insurance
company pays your widoew now will
purchase only as much as SSOO
would purchase in 1914, due to the
“80-cent dollar.” Thus, as a mat
ter of fact, your wife and children
would be cut off with only half of
what you had planned to leaye
them,
It's worth thinking about, isn’t
it?—Columbus ILedger.
Sure it is. But, thinking about
it, let's plan to whipsaw them. Take
out the SI,OOO insurance policy now.
Go right ahead paying premiums.
Then, in a couple of decades of
years, if vou will then make it
convenient to die, vour widow will
get one thousand 100c¢ dollars, which
yvou earned for her by paying pre
miums with 50c dollars. It takes
just about fifteen or twenty years
for a country to right itself fol
lowing a war.
So sure as death is to come, just
so sure I 8 life insurance your duty.
The husbard and father who does
not carry life insurance to the full
est extent he can, does an injustice
to his wife and to his children.
THE VACANT SCHOOLROOM.
(Ameriggs Times-Recorder.)
Twenty-five hundred schoolrooms
are vacant in Texas because the
teachers, not able to live on the
salaries paid, have heen forced to
seek other employment to exist.
This was brought out at the meet
ing of the National Education As
sociation at Cleveland. And a lot
of other similar facts were also
brought out.
The situation s perilous to the
welfare of the nation. Publie edu
cation has heen the spring from
which has flown much of our na
tional progress and greatness, and
which is responsible to a great ex
tent for our high type of citizen
ship. Close our schoolrooms and
our country will go to decay. That
{8 not only what will happen if
our teachers are not paid a living
wage, hut what is already happen
ing. The problem is not local to
Texas, but has hit us right here in
Georgia and Americus, We haven't
had to close any schoolrooms yet,
but we've come mighty close to it
-~and may have to yet if condi
tions do not change. 4
'FRAID CAT!
(Alpharetta Free Press.)
We have already written Geor
gia's next governor's name on the
underside of a blodk of woed and
hidden i in our cellar until after
the September primary. Then we
are going to fetch it out to the
light and exclaim, '“Wa told you
so!™
O VISION RARE!
(Dahlonega Nnmap
We see wheres jug of rum has
been found which is said to be 152
years old and mi’ht be a sure cure
for the flu. ’ ) :
Ye Towne Gossip
By K. C. B.
JUST A' year gone past.
. -
AND WE’RE back again, =
- - -
OUT ON the ranch.
* - »
WHERE‘ OUR grandnephew lives.
- .
WHO I 8 two years old. |
* . -
WITH HIS rancher dad.
* - *
AND OUR favorite niece,
- . .
WHOQO IS dad’s wife. "
- » -
AND THE two-year-old.
- - -
DIDN'T KNOW us at all.
- - *
WHICH ISN'T strange.
- - *
BUT FROM the train. ’
* - *
WHERE WE were met.
* - *
UNTIL THIS hour.
* . .
JUST FORTY-EIGHT hours.
* - -
HAVE FLITTED by.
- - *
AND IN that time. :
* . .
THAT TWO-YEAR-OLD,
* - -
HAS MAULED me around.
- - .
AND DRIVEN me.
- - *
AND SO’METIMES coaxed.
- -
AND MADE me do.
y.B
QUITE SILLY things.
- . -
THAT HAVE soiled my clothes.
* . -
AND MUSSED my hair.
- - .
AND TIRED me out.
- - -
UNTIL AT night.
- - *
WHEN THEY bring i in.
- L -
ALL DRESSED for bed.
. - -
AND HE hugs me tight,
- - -
AND KISSES me.
» - -
AND SAYS “good-by.”
- . -
WHICH IS his “good night.”
- - .
I'M TRULY glad.
s . - -
THAT HE'S gone to bed.
- - -
ALTHOUGH | know.
- - -
THAT ALONG about six.
- - -
AND IT'Sestill quite dark.
Shafts of Sunshine
When thought messages get im
vogue, whalp will the plaintiffs in
breach of promise suits do for evi
dence?
» 8 9
Brew and the world brews with
you. Thirst and ym‘x thirst alone.
- -
Love may laugh at locksmiths,
‘but it never gave the ha-ha to the
present price of groceries,
- . -
If every man who thinks he
knows just how the nation's busi-
AND MORNING comes.
- * -
THAT HE’LL be there,
* * *
AT THE side of my bed.
* * *
AND WE'LL start in again.
* * *
FOR ANOTHER day.
* » * !
WITH A slight respite.
* - -
JUST AFTER lunch.
* * *
WHEN HE eats his fill.
- x -
AND IS carried away.
* - -
AND PUT to bed. !
- * -
AND STAYS in bed.
* - .
TILL ALONG about three.
* - *
AND HE’S in bed now.
- - -
AS | write these lines.
* * *
AND WHILE I'm here.
- - -
I'LL DO my work.
* - -
AT THIS same hour.
- - -
FOR | know quite well.
- - -
HE'D WANT to help.
® e
IF HE were up.
- = *
AND ABOUT his mother,
g e 5
1 MUST admit.
* - -
THAT SHE seems quite pleased.
* - -
THAT WE are here.
- - -
AND MAYBE she loves us.
- - *
BUT AS for me.
- - -
IF | were her.
- - .
AND HAD a kid.
- - -
A 8 BUSY as hers.
- - -
I'D LOVE any relative,
. - *
THAT WOULD come along.
- - -
AND LET himself.
* - -
BE MAULED around.
- . .
AND CHASED aroupd.
* - -
AND ALL tired out. .
- - -
JUST LIKE I am.
WHEN NIGHT time comes.
- - *
I THANK you.
ness ought to be run had & seat in
the cabinet, that body would have
to meet out on a prairie,
- L
Perhaps the shimmy was origi
nated by profiteers who “shake” a
man for his last dime.
- - *
A lot of _men will waste their
time readin® thi%column when they
ought to he helping their wives with
the breakfast dishes. i
- - - .
Sing a song of expense—pocket
ful of rye.
Mark Twain on
Chtistian Science
By AN ATLANTAN.
ARK TWAIN never felt any
M obligation to hold to an
opinion forever, simply be
cause he had written and published
it
When he was in mid-career he
wrote a particularly witty and bit
ter attack on Christian Science, and
for the rest of his life he was con
sidered the chief public enemy of
that faith.
{ Mrs. Mary Baker Eddy answered
the attack in her book, “The First
Church of Christ Secientist, and
Miscellany.” She wrote:
“In his article, of which I have
seen. only extracts, Mark Twain's
wit was not wasted in certain di
rections. Christian Science eschews
divine rights in human beings, If
the individual governad human con
sciousness, my statement of Christ
ian Science would be disproved;
but to demonstrate science and its
pure mon?heism-one God, one
Christ, ns idolatry, o lhuman prop
agandag—it is essential to under
stand the spiritual idea. ' Jesus
taught and proved that what fgeda
a few feeds all. His life work
subogdinated the material to the
spiritual, and he left his legacy of
truth to mankind. His methaphysics
is not the sport of philosophy, re
liglon, er science; rather is it the
pith and finale of them all.
“l have not the ingpiration nor
the aspiration to be a first or sec
ond Virgin mother—her duplicate,
antecedent, or subsequent. What I
am remains to be proved by the
good I do. We need much hu
mility, wisdom, and love to perform
the functions of foreshadowing and
foretasting heaven within us. This
glory is molten in the furnace of
affliction.”
Mark Twain apparently paid no
attention to the reply and seemed
not to have changed his mind.
Many years later, when Albert
Bigelow Palne was writing his
biography, the writer became inter
ested ‘n mental healing and was
treated for neurasthenia with good
results. One day he confessed rather
reluctantly the benefits he had re
ceived expecting causine comment
from the humorist. Eut Twain an
swered:
“Of course, you have been beneflt
ted. Christian Science is humanity's
boon. Mother Eddy deserves a
place in the Trinity as much as any
member of it. She has organized
and made available a healing prin
ciple that for 2,000 yvears has never
been employed, except as the mer
est kind of guesswork. She is the
benefactor of the age.”
It seemed strange, it the time,
to hear him speak in this way con
cerning a practise of which he was
generally regarded is the chief pub
liec antagonist.
1t was another angle of his many
sided character.
PUBLIC SERVICE '
Caught ,
' IN THE Tb |
— Jamesß.Nevin
HE las:!fonfederate soldier to
I serve governor of Georgia
was Nathaniel E, Harris of
Macon. The last Confederate sol
dier to serve in the Senate of the
United States from Georgia was
Augustus O. Bacon of Macon. This
is a proud and honorable distine
tion, and Macon should hold it
very dear to her neart—and, of
course, does.
The last Confederate soldier tos‘
serve as a senator from any South
ern State was John Hollis Bank
head, the veteran who passed on
a few days since in Washington,
at his post of duty and literally
in harness at the time of his
death. There may be a Confederate
soldier or so left in the natiomal
House, of that I am not fully in=
formed; there is none in the Geor
gia delegation. Chief Justice Bd
ward White of the 3upreme Court
is a veteran of the “lost rause.” He &
is about the last of that noble gal
axy left in the larger public life
of the nation. A few veterans are
scattered through Southern legisla
tures and in minor offices, of
course; but for the most part, the
old Confederate oifice holders are
no more, i
Time was, as I can well remem
ber myself, when the old “rebe‘l’"
yvell” was quite sufficient to insure
election to office in Georgia, when
one candidate was a “vet” and the
other was not. When DbOth Wweére
“vets,” the Lord only knew what
would happen, unless their opnosing
records compared most unfavorably
for one. 1 recall the big battle be
tween General Gordon and Major
Bacon for the governorship. Gordon
won that fight, not because of his
greater ability or statesmanship—
for he was no abler man than Ba
con, most people think not so able—
but because he was the more con=-
spicuous of the two men in his
distinguished and glorious war rec
ord. .
The very first breakaway I re
cally, from the old order of thlngs<
in éeorgia was when William Y.
Atkinson defeated Gen. Clement A.
Evans for the governorship—and
the feat astonished tne natives, too.
The first vote I ever cast was in
that primary—l wasn’t quite 21, but
was due to arrive at that proud
estate between the primary date
and the date of the general elec
tion: so they let me vote, especinly
as the Evans crowd had control of
things in Floyd County at the
time, and I was “right” for the
general.
But I stuck to my guns; and I
do not recall ever voting against
a Confederate veteran. Certainly,
I put in one for “Uncle Allan”
Candler when he came along; and
“Uncle Nat” Harris, largely for that
reason.
Well, that’s water over the well
known dam nowadays. As that
dear and sweet minded old “vet”
Capt. “Tip” Harrison used to say,
“Us old veterans a good while ago
ceased expecting to get the votes
we used to!”
Alabama’s history hae been rich
with Confederate snldiers in high
office. N¢ braver soldiers ever sat
in the Senate than old John T.
Morgan and Edmund W. Pettus.
It was my rare good fortune to
live in Washington a few years,
during the life time of these fine
old gentleman and statesmen un
afraid. John T. Morgan had the
courage of a lion; and so had Pet
tus, for that matter, but the latter
was possessed of a finer sense
of humor than the former. The
funniest thing I ever saw and heard
in the Senate was Pettus’ “take off”
of young Mr, Beveridge of Indiana.
Beveridge .was a new senator at
the time, very youngz, vVery eels
satisfied and pompous When he
sat down after his first bumptious
speech, Pettus got up and delivered
a speech of fifteen minutes’ dura
‘nn that they still are talking about
» Washington. It was an extreme
-7 clever “take off” of Beveridge
—the mimiery was perfect. It did
Beveridze a lot of good, too; for
he was a wise young man, in his
day and generation, and he had
sense enough to iearn something
new now and then.
HEN Morgan first entered
NX/ the Senate mnearly every
prominent Southern sen
ator was a former Confederate
soldier. South Carolina sent
Hampton And Butler; North Car
olina, Matt Ransom; Georgia,
Gordon and Colquitt: Mississippi,
Walthall and George Louisiana,
Gibson and Eustis; Fexa.s, Coke;
Arkansas, Berry; Tennessee, Bate
and Harris; Missouri, Cockrell;
Kentucky, Blackburn: Virginia,
Mahone (a Republican) and Dan
iel; Florida, Pasco; West Virginia,
Kenna and Faulkner.
There was a rare collection of
statesmanship, very eea.r to the
heart of its constituency!
These men were hound together
by strong ties; theirs was a com
munion—of kindred souls; all had
been through the fire, they were
there in the Congress as the rep
resentatives of a people defeated
and undone—theirs was a land of
sorrow and poverty and vexation of -
spirit. To them was entrusted the
task ernging the South back
to its n. Never did the South
see in any one of themn a discredited
leader, merely because the South
had been defeated on the battle
field. Y
And never was a more. winning
group of men assemnled in the Sen
ate; theyv were of “the old South,”
the South of chivalry, of hospitality,
of gentleness of speech and suavity
)f manner, of love and veneration of
womanhood, prowd—but, good Lord,
never too proud to fizht!
Fight was their middle name, in
deed, with Courtesy on the one
flank and Courage on the other.
With them were such brave souls
as Vest of Missouri, once a senator
in the Confederate Congress; Rea
gan, postmaster gencral of the Con
federacy, and Vance, North Car
olina.
And of all this wonderful group
of men, which later on included
the ‘“younger soldiers” of the Con
federacy, such as Bacon and the
like, John Hollis Bankhead had the
great privilege of being last.
They were a grand and noble
~clan. Peace to their revered and
precious memories!
