The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, February 24, 1919, Page 6

e S O e TR A © Sea’s. N e g A T A S A - not gone through the formality of being sentenced? outside of the power of the secretary of war to release those who AR AN Y e Z W W « Ll QN 3 S\ N N\ NN NN \\\\\\ - AN A\ R A Nonparigan Teader Official Magazine of the National Nonpartisan League—Every Week 7/t Entered as second-class matter September 8, 1915, at the postoffice at St. Paul, Minnesota, under the Act of March 3, 1879. . OLIVER 8. MORKIS, Editor E. B. Fussell and A. B. Gilbert, Associate Editors Advertising rates on application. Subscription, one year, in advance, $2.50; six months, $1.50. Please do not make checks, drafts nor money orders payable to indi- viduals. Address all letters and make all remittances to The Nonpartisan Leader, Box 575, St. Paul, Minn. B. O. Foss, Art Editor MEMBER OF AUDIT BUREAU OF CIRCULATIONS THE S. C. BECKWITH SPECIAL AGENCY, Advertising Representatives, New York, Chicago, St. Louis, Detroit, Kansas City. Quack, fraudulent and irresponsible firms are not knowingly advertised, and- we will take it as a favor if any readers will advise us promptly should they have occasion to doubt or question the reliability of any firm which patronizes our advertising coiumns. - POLITICAL PRISONERS : SECRETARY OF WAR BAKER has released another batch of conscientious objectors. Practically all that now remain in custody are those who have been sentenced, some of them to 20 and 30 years, and who are in military prisons. The good work of granting amnesty to political prisoners, however, has not pro- ceeded far enough. All the conscientious objectors serving near- life terms, whose only “crime” was being true to their consciences, should also be released. Why hold them while releasing their fel- lows, just as “guilty” as they are, simply because their fellows had It may be are sentenced, and if it takes a presidential pardon, Mr. Baker should recommend to the president such a pardon at once. ' And we can not even stop when we have freed the conscientious objectors. What of the hundreds of persons convicted for the ex- pression of opinion during the war? No steps whatever have yet been taken to give THEM amnesty. In fact, the prosecutions g0 ERROR OF OPINION MAY BE TOLERATED REASON 1S LEFT FREE TO COMBAT IT. Jftsons merrily on. Granting the right of the government to lock up these war heretics during the war, mistaken as they may have been in their opinions, what earthly reason has a republic, boasting of its democracy and free political institutions, to keep men in jail NOW for their opinions? Despite the bitter-enders and hate-panderers, the war is over. Can America, for over a century and a quarter the haven of political refugees who have been pursued in other lands for their political opinions, itself, at this time, especially when we have made certain promises about making the world safe for de- mocracy—can America afford to keep her prisons full of men who have expressed opinions which differ with the majority? The National Civil Liberties bureau, 41 Union Square, New Eop WHERE, York, is urging demonstrations all over the United States on Lin- coln’s birthday in favor of amnesty for political prisoners. Read- ers of the Leader who desire to help in preventing the establish- ment of a precedent in this country which makes it unsafe for citi- zens, no matter how mistaken, to express their honest opinions, may correspond with the Civil Liberties bureau. The bureau will be glad to send all who write it its pamphlets and petitions. GETTING OUT OF RUSSIA I T IS with no little satisfaction that we have read the news from Versailles recently. We have been accused of being defenders - of murderers and anarchists because we have insisted on the right of Russia to self-determination, and on the withdrawal of the armed forces-making war on the Russian people. But we now read, first, that President Wilson and Premier Lloyd George have put up to France the proposition of withdrawing all American and allied troops from Russia, and, second, that even though France continues to insist on violent interference with internal affairs in Russia, Great Britain is going to withdraw its troops. That means the United States will also withdraw from Russia. : ~This is making some progress toward redeeming our promise to the world that, among other cardinal democratic principles, we were fighting in the great war to establish the right of all nations S v e, gy, % ”//% 7’//////// 'I//}///// //////// to free development and self-determination. This great principle is something entirely apart from the question of bolshevism and from the question of whether or not the Russian Soviet government is right. The Leader has no brief for the Bolsheviki of Russia. We have not approved or indorsed them in any way, but we have in- sisted, and will continue to insist, on the right of Russia, under the Bolsheviki or any other party, mistaken or enlightened, to deter- mine its own form of government and to work out such reforms and try such experiments as it chooses, without outside interference. By supporting monarchial groups in Russia, encouraging coun- ter revolution there and making war on what plainly seems to be HOLOING HiM BACK. a government supported by a majority of the people, we are sub- scribing to a doctrine that will make the world as unsafe for democ- racy as it could possibly be. If the powers are to have the right to invade nations to “preserve order” or to upset governments es- tablished by the people, because the powers may believe those gov- ernments are too radical, then no people’s government anywhere will be safe. The world will be continually at war. We will have set a precedent for invading Mexico and forcing on the Mexicans a form of government which we, not they, approve. We will have set a precedent for preventing Germany and other new republics in Europe from establishing the kind of governments they want. America a century ago asserted to the world the right of self- determination of nations. At that time we warned European pow- ers to keep their hands off the new republics set up in Central and South America, and that warning was known as the Monroe Doc- trine. President Wilson has merely extended the Monroe Doctrine to all the world. He has declared for the right of nations EVERY- WHERE to self-determination, and in accordance with that war aim, accepted along with the “14 points” by Italy, Great Britain and France, the American and allied armies must be withdrawn from Russia at once, or we must admit that -we lied when we stated to the world what our war aims were. THE FACTS ; O NCE more we pause to answer briefly the ridiculous charge that the farmers’ constitutional amendments in North Da- kota were declared passed in violation of the law, and that “a supreme court servile to the Nonpartisan league” upheld that violation. g . : The plain facts are that, seven years before the Nonpartisan league was organized, the supreme court of North Dakota defined the meaning of language in the constitution requiring “a majority of the legal votes cast at the election” to pass measures voted upon by the people. The court then held that no “legal vote” could be cast at an election unless it was cast for or against the measure under consideration. Therefore, a majority of thése VOTING ON THE MEASURE is all that is required to pass constitutional amendments in North Dakota. . : This decision was. written for the court by a judge afterwards defeated for re-election by the League—a judge who is now num- bered among the League’s ardent opponents. The League, and the judges elected by the farmers to the supreme court of North Da- kota, therefore are not responsible for the interpretation of the THIS SHOULD BE FINAL, ——— v e 4 KEPT PRESS, 13?"& constitution which permits constitutional changes to be made by a majority of the voters voting on the changes. . It is true that the present supreme court of North Dakota has affirmed the passage of the farmers’ constitutional amendments, which received majorities at the polls of from 20,000 to 30,000 of . those voting on them. But the present supreme court has merely followed a precedent set long before the League was organized. The decision of the present court, upholding the verdict of the can- . vassing board, points out also another precedent, showing that, since its organization as a state 80 years ago, North Dakota has held to the rule that a majority of those voting on a proposition before the people is sufficient to pass it. Thirty years ago the peo- : o _ ~ PAGE BIX 5 : r < - k 4