The new North-west. [volume] (Deer Lodge, Mont.) 1869-1897, 1881-02-11
THAT UPPER VALLEY PETITION
w. r, II. EDWARDS EXPLAINS HIS
ACTION.
How the Names Were Obtained to that
Butte Representation--w Who Misrep-
resented the Valley People

To the Editor of the New Northwest.
see by the Butte Miner publication pur.
porting to be petition, with list of names
published thereto, claiming to have been
signed by me. Also, saw to-day for the
first time Mr.. O'Bannon's card in the NEW
NORTH WEST.
have this to say: LIST, never placed any
of these names to any petition, or anything
purporting to be petition; I'd, The Miner
states that was the party entrusted with
petition to canvass this section in favor OF 60
ing into Silver Bow county, If divided. This
is correct Twas.
And now for the facts. / was requested
while in Butte to do this and promised par
ties to do so. But, upon returning home, /
found my wife confined to bed with raging
fever. This was on Friday evening, Decem-
Der 21st. (This is evidently intended to be
January 21st.-ED. N. N.-W.) On Saturday
morning wrote to those parties stating my
inability to attend to the business, and sent
them list of names of those who had signed
the anti-division petition who were land and
stock owners, numbering some thirty odd,
and rejecting those whe were only temper
atily working or living in the region (manv
of whom were not citizens), stating why the
others were rejected, plainly, as / supposed
and still think, and also a list of names OF
those who had not signed the anti-diyision
petition, stating, If they could get an availa-
BILE man TO 90 around, that | thought he
could get names enough to stand off that
number, and did suggest the name of w. A.
Hensley. This was written on a sheet oil
note paper and the names upon two separate
parts of old letters, as it was all the paper
had save the blank of the petition, which
have yet untarnished, and addressed the
same to prominent Butte Divisionist. This
is my offense, and if aught of wrong
fail to see it, even though some one has evi,
IDENTIFY committed in some shape fragrant
outrage and thrown me between the upper
and neither millstones, as it were, and In
which appear to get the grinding.
MY reasons for not stating who the party Is
to whom directed the letter are that as ye'
do not know who to blame, and for the
present leave IL to the magnanimity Of the
gentleman to explain, and l would rather
suffer temporary abrasion than to wrong
any one, although wronged myself. OF one
thing am satisfied, that Mr.. Hensley wa.
misled and think the Miner guiltless. How
twas done know not.
And now my reasons for not denying ths
fraud sooner. Up until yesterday was to
tally ignorant of the whole matter, not hay
Ing received my papers, and not seeing the
NEW NORTHWEST until to-day at Mr.
Ford's (my own was lost between here and
the postoffice.) Hoping that no gentlemen
will for moment believe me guilty of sucl
a piece of audacious mischief, and wei
knowing that few whose names were append
ed would believe 1t, and though not Divis
ionist then nor am ! yet, yet If 1t must b
preferring to be in the new county on accoun
of being eleven miles nearer the proposed
county seat there than If / remained In the
old county, / ask through your columns thi'
simple statement of facts and will abide the
decision. ., Respectfully yours, 4.
''''.'' @'s5's 49, w. r. III. EDWARDS.
UPPER DEER LODGE VALLEY, Feb. 4, 81