The Cortland Democrat, Friday, November
1888.
Churches vs. Saloons.
The Cortland Standard is an
enterprising sheet in one respect at least. It is bound to keep the people of
this place in motion, whether the result be for the people's good or to their
injury; and possibly with both objects in view, the editor interviewed
the clergymen of this place last week and published the result. He asked the views
of these gentlemen upon the question of temperance, high license [tax on
alcoholic beverages—CC editor] and the candidature of Warner Miller and David
H. Hill.
The gentlemen interviewed were Revs. Cordo
of the Baptist church, Avery of the Methodist, Taylor of the Congregational, Arthur
of the Episcopal and Robertson of the Presbyterian and Revs. Brigham and
Kniskern, retired. He attempted to interview the pastors of St. Marys, but as the
fathers of the Mother Church give their whole time and attention to the
spiritual and temporal welfare, instead of the political interests, of the
members of their flock, he did not succeed. It was also noticeable that he did
not interview two prominent and very reputable retired clergymen who reside
almost within a stone's throw of the Standard building.
All of the gentlemen interviewed are today
and always have been, unless we are misinformed, republicans of the strictest
sort for whom the DEMOCRAT entertains the highest respect. Neither of them, to
our knowledge, ever voted for a reputable democratic candidate and against a
disreputable republican. They are republicans from Republicanville, and as such
take whatever medicine the party physicians prescribe.
Each and every one of them commended Warner
Miller; some of them favored high license and all were opposed to David B. Hill
[incumbent governor—CC editor] for vetoing the bill. The interviewing to have
been complete and entirely satisfactory should have included answers to the
following questions:
1. What
are your views on the free whiskey plank in the Republican National Platform?
2. Does the
position of Benjamin Harrison as a candidate on such a platform commend itself
to you?
3. Are you
in favor of taking the tax off whiskey, tobacco and oleomargarine?
4. Is the
election of Benjamin Harrison on such a platform desirable?
It would have been interesting to see how our
clergymen would have answered the two sets of questions. We have no doubt that
it would have taxed their ingenuity to the utmost, for how could they
consistently in the same interview, commend Miller for favoring high license
and Harrison for advocating free whiskey.
Editor
Clark was evidently aware of the difficulty or he would have put similar
questions, for while he was seeking a certificate of good character for Miller
from the republican clergy men of this village, it would have been a good thing
to have had Harrison's name included in the certificate. If any votes are to be
gained for Miller, by showing that the moral element of our town is favorable
to him, why wouldn’t it have the same effect in the case of Harrison?
But why do our reverend friends continue to
temporize with the devil? It seems to us that it would be far better, and much more
consistent for them to arise in their might and smite him hip and thigh. Cast off
the shackles of a party that refuses to give the poor man the same rights that
it proposes to guarantee to the rich, and don the robes of the party that
fights intemperance and crime tooth and nail and refuses to make any compromise
with evil whatever. Be consistent and be just. The poor man has as much right
to engage in the liquor traffic as the rich. If it is morally wrong for the
poor man to sell liquor, how can it be morally right for the rich man to do
likewise?
Warner Miller expects to have all the vote
of the wealthy liquor dealers and he will undoubtedly get many of them. They
would have a monopoly of the business and the rich rum seller would become
still richer. There might be fewer places where liquor would be sold but does
anybody believe that less liquor would be drank? The rich rum seller sells his
goods to the laboring man as readily as to the nabob.
What a queer spectacle will be presented to
the common people next Tuesday. Standing
side by side at the polls may be seen the priest and the wealthy rum seller
each with a ballot for free whiskey and another for high license in his hand,
both voting for the same object, viz: the pecuniary benefit of the rum seller.
Here and there may be seen a Prohibitionist who votes as he preaches. He may
not elect his candidate, but his conscience will tell him in after years that
he did his duty, and when he is called to account for his stewardship, the page
will be clean.
PAGE
TWO/EDITORIALS.
If a protective tariff raises the price of farm
produce, why don't it raise the price of potatoes? Do the farmers ever think of
this? They could stand a raise from present prices.
Six hundred and twenty dollars is a large
sum for a lawyer to charge for drawing up a summons and complaint, worth $15,
but that is the exact amount Bronson charged the poor widow, Mrs. Scott, for the
service.
Samuel H. Wandell, a prominent lawyer of
Syracuse, and a lifelong republican, has come out for Cleveland and Thurman. He
says the republican cry of "protection" is a humbug and he won't swallow
the fraud.
One of Mat Quay's repeaters from Philadelphia
registered in four election districts in New York, and is now serving two years
and six months time in Sing Sing for his playfulness. Philadelphia is a good town,
but Philadelphia isn't New York.
Bronson is the candidate of the old
"Cortland Ring." Almost every night for the past two or three weeks,
he and ex-judge A. P. Smith have been speaking to small audiences in the out
towns. He was a ring candidate in 1883, and he hasn't fallen from grace.
The Standard charges that James
Dougherty has never had any cases in a court of record. Mr. Dougherty has six important
cases on the present calendar of the Supreme Court, as any one can see who will
take the pains to look at the calendar which was printed at the Standard
office.
A lawyer [Bronson] who had a heart in his bosom
would not have charged Mrs. Scott one penny above actual disbursements in her
suit against the Hitchcock Mfg. Co. She had lost a kind husband and was thrown penniless
upon the cold charities of the world, and she was entitled to the sympathy of
even a Tombs lawyer.
For the last twelve years Borthwick and
VanHoesen have been playing the game of see-saw with the office of Sheriff.
First Borthwick goes up and then VanHoesen. Seesaw, seesaw, now you go up and
then you go down again, and they really seem to enjoy it. How long the game is
to last rests with the voters of the county. It must be admitted however that
VanHoesen has made a competent official.
James G. Blaine went to Congress a poor man and came back a millionaire.
[Roscoe] Conkling went to Congress a poor man, and was a
colleague of Blaine's during the latter’s
service, and came home as poor as when he went to Washington. Blaine had no
better opportunities for making money than Conkling but the latter
preserved his integrity. Blaine will be the power behind the
throne if Harrison is elected.
Bronson presented a big bill to the Board of
Supervisors for expenses in going to Philadelphia in the Lewis case. Lewis was
indicted and has been in jail for several months. Two weeks ago he was brought
up for trial and the defendant's counsel moved for his discharge on the ground
that the indictment was defective, which was granted. Wouldn't it be just as
well to elect a District Attorney that knows enough to draw up an ordinary
indictment?
The widows and orphan's mite should be
sacred. He who attempts to filch one penny from their little store is worse than
a robber. It is the bought and bounden duty of the District Attorney of this
county to protect the innocent and the weak, as well as to punish criminals,
and the people should see that he does so or make him suffer the consequences.
The widow of Frank Scott was left penniless. All she had in the world was a
right of action against the Hitchcock Mfg. Co., to recover damages for the
killing of her husband. District Attorney Bronson was her attorney and he
settled the case without trial for $1500, of which amount he retained the
handsome fee of $620, for services worth not more than $25. Is he a safe man to
hold this office for another term?
The Standard
claims that the DEMOCRAT "can't name a single criminal case in which he
(Bronson) has been beaten during his term of office." We have only to
refer to the court proceedings published in the Standard, in its issue
of Oct.18th, to convict our brother of willful lying. In those proceedings will
be found an account of the Lewis ease, wherein the indictment was dismissed by
the court, simply because the District Attorney didn't know enough to draw it
properly.
The Standard charges Mr. James
Dougherty with "using his position as Clerk of a Republican Board of
Supervisors and custodian of county bills to set afloat lying stories about
photograph albums, letter presses and legitimate expenses of his opponent."
Mr. Dougherty never saw the copy of Bronson's bills against the county which
the DEMOCRAT published. They were obtained from an entirely different source
and have been in our side since the meeting of the Board of Supervisors last
winter. Mr. Dougherty had nothing to do with furnishing copies of the bills and
did not even know that we had them.
The Standard
accuses the DEMOCRAT of lying. Our neighbor enjoys a monopoly in this industry
and we have no ambition to become a member of the "trust." Even if we
desired to become a candidate for initiation into the pool of lyers [sic,
perhaps a compressed abbreviation of the words liars and lawyers. Mr. Clark and
Mr. Jones were non-practicing lawyers—CC editor], we should hesitate about
sending our name in, on account of inexperience and lack of qualifications for
a seat in our brother's charmed circle. There seems to be a Chinese wall of
protection about our neighbor that would bar out all of the small dealers in
the art of misrepresentation. Our neighbor has nothing to fear from us. We
shall never be a candidate for an office that is so ably and completely filled
by another.
The Standard says that "no one
ever lost a dollar by placing business in Borthwick's hands when he was
sheriff." That may be true, but several parties had to sue him to obtain
their money, and others had to threaten him to get it out of his hands. The
bank in Ithaca brought suit against him to recover the amount of a judgment against
the Colegrove brothers. The execution was placed in Borthwick's hands. The bank
sued him, obtained a judgment and finally collected the amount. But it took the
best part of a year to do it. Eli J. Colgrove is working might and main for
Borthwick's election, and if they are successful it is understood that Colgrove
is to be Under Sheriff. A good pair to look out for the interests of the
people.
Mr. James H. Turner, the Democratic candidate
for County Clerk, would make an excellent officer if he should be elected. His
education and business training have been of the best, and especially fit him
for the performance of the duties of the office. His Republican opponent [R. J. Peck] is a
country merchant in a small way, and the duties of the office would be new and not
easily mastered by him. The office is a responsible one, and candidates should have
had some previous business training of a kind that would fit them for the
place. Mr. Turner has had this training and experience, and is in every way
well qualified. An expert accountant and an adept at figures, besides
possessing an excellent knowledge of legal forms, there is no qualification lacking.
One blunder in our Clerk's office might and probably would affect many persons
injuriously. See to it that the best man is chosen. Turner is that man.
Mat Quay has sent his "pay
envelopes" to manufacturers in this place. So far we have heard of only
one firm that has used them to pay off their employees, and we mistrust that
this firm used them more because they didn't cost anything than because they cared
to influence their employees. We very soon had one of the envelopes used in our
possession. The employee to whom it was given did not take so charitable a view
of the matter however, as the DEMOCRAT does. Another manufacturer, to whom a package
was sent, gave us one of the envelopes at the same time remarking that "if
he had a man in his employ who would accept his pay in one of those envelopes,
he would discharge him." It is an attempt to intimidate the employee and a
laboring man who respects himself and his own opinions would resent the insult as
it deserves to be resented.
The Standard says that District Attorney Bronson "can be found
each day at the Court House, in Court attending strictly to the county
business. He stands at the wheel while the Democratic candidates are away doing
electioneering for themselves." Did any one ever hear such twaddle ?
District Attorney Bronson has no more to do with the case on trial than the man
in the moon. The case is being tried on the part of the People by ex-Judge A.
P. Smith, of this place, E. Delehanty, Esq., of Brooklyn and Hon. N. C. Moak, of
Albany. Bronson isn't noticed in the case any more than the blue-bottled fly
that is engaged in decorating the ceiling of the Court room. The Standard also
says that the county won't have to pay these lawyers anything. When did A. P.
Smith or H. C. Moak engage in the trial of a long case for fun?
If there is at bigger fraud in the
United States than Jim Belden of Syracuse, he lives at Bridgeport, Conn., and
his name is Phineas T. Barnum. He has become rich by deceiving the public and
that has been his business since childhood. Four years ago he made a speech at
his home and announced that he would sell all his property if Cleveland was
elected for twenty five per cent less than its value. Cleveland was elected and
that was the last that any one heard of the proposition. Not long afterwards, however,
he did sell some of his property for twenty five per cent more than its value.
A day or two since, he made a speech at the same place and introduced the same
old chestnut. He is very careful, however, not to state what he considers the
property worth. Undoubtedly the valuation that he would put upon it would enable
him to sell at a reduction of twenty five per cent, and still obtain more than
the property was worth. Great is the American humbug, and Barnum is the humbug
of them all.
Do the people of this county want a man for
sheriff who takes $475 from a man who has been robbed by professional thieves,
for simply apprehending the robbers and obtaining the money? It is the duty of
the sheriff to protect the citizens of the county and to apprehend all criminals
and bring them to justice without fee or reward from any private citizen.
During Borthwick's last term as sheriff, Lorenzo Smith, an aged man of this
place, was robbed of $1030. Borthwick and John P. Lee were sent to Lock Haven,
Pa. to arrest the parties and obtain the money if possible. They succeeded in
arresting the thieves and securing the money. The thieves were let go, and when
Borthwick and Lee returned they went to Smith and returned the money, except
$475. Which they kept for their services. They were not entitled to anything as
the county pays the sheriff' for his services. The Standard don't deny
this charge which we published last week, simply because it cannot do so. It is
true.
A canvass of the votes in the Hitchcock
M'f'g Company's shops in this place, was made recently, under the supervision
of Mr. Henry L. Beebe, an employee, who vouches for its correctness. It was
found that on the 23d of Oct. there were among the employees of the company
just 168 voters, besides many women and minors. Of 36 voters in the blacksmith shop, 20 were Democrats, 14 Republicans and 2 Prohibitionists. Of the 14 voters in the trim shop 12 were Democrats and 2 Republicans. (Four years ago Mr. Beebe and the foreman were the only Democrats
in this shop.) Of the 30 voters
in the paint shop 20 were
Democrats and 10 Republicans. In
the wood shop there are 58 voters, of
whom 33 are Democrats, 17 Republicans and
8 Prohibitionists. This shop was strongly—almost
unanimously—Republican four
years ago. In the engine and shipping
rooms, the yard and office, there are
24 voters—14 Democrats, 7 Republicans, 3 Prohibitionists. Of the five voters among the traveling men 4 are
Democrats and 1 Republican. It
will be noticed that there is a
large majority of Democrats in
every department of this big factory. The
sum total is 103 Democrats, 51 Republicans, 14 Prohibitionists.
Our neighbor still sticks to the potato lie.
He says that "the bill itself (the Mills bill) is better evidence than Mr.
Mills' interpretation of it." Now if brother Clark was anything of a
lawyer, he would know that the rule with Courts is invariably to interpret every
law precisely in accordance with the meaning and intention of the framers of
the law. They are not to make their own interpretation but it is their duty to
learn what the framers of the bill meant to say when they passed the same.
But as our neighbor objects to Mr. Mills' word simply because he is a democrat;
we will furnish republican testimony. Congressman Thos. B. Reed of Maine, is a
member of the committee that framed the bill and is the Republican leader of
the House of Representatives. Here is what he said when the Mills bill was
before the House:
Mr. Reed: We have already provided that
there should be fifteen cents a bushel duty upon potatoes.—[Congressional
Record, page 8614.]
Here is what Mr. Boutelle, another prominent
Republican Member of Congress from Maine said on the same occasion:
Mr. Boutelle: I call the attention of the
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. McMillan) to the fact that under the existing
law, which the Mills bill does not
propose to disturb in this respect, the duty on potatoes is fixed a fifteen cents
per bushel.—[Congressional Record, page 6658.]
It would certainly seem as though our
neighbor would be ashamed of himself but we strongly suspect that he has become
lost to all sense of decency.
Willson Greene, the Democratic candidate for
Member of Assembly, is successful business man and farmer residing in the town
of Willett. He has represented his town in the Board of Supervisors for the
past ten years, serving one year as chairman of the board. Few men in the
county are better equipped than Mr. Greene, as far as ability and experience in
the transaction of public business is concerned, for the office of Member of Assembly.
As a rule, the Republican party selects lawyers or merchants to represent them
in the Legislature, instead of farmers. The farmer pays most of the taxes, and
certainly ought to have something to say as to the manner in which the money should
be spent. Occasionally our Republican friends have seen fit to send a farmer to
the Legislature, but in nearly every case the selection was a most unfortunate
one. Instead of nominating a representative man, they have chosen the poorest
timber possible. Mr. Greene understands the needs of the farmer, and as he is
also an excellent business man, he would represent the farmers of the county in
a manner that would be to their credit as well as his own. His experience as a
member of the board of supervisors for so many years, would be valuable to him
as well as to his constituents. His opponent lacks this experience and would
require at least one term to fit him for the place. Mr. Greene's nomination
came to him unpurchased and unsought. It would he well for his opponent on the
Republican ticket if he could say as much. Vote for Willson Greene for Member
of Assembly and you will have nothing to regret in after years.
No comments:
Post a Comment