The Russellville Democrat., 1882-07-13
Response to w. r. w.
Editor Democrat

article te appear Ill the columns oi your valuable paper over my initials that would be an appropriate reply to the last effort of W. P. w., on free passes" and, were it not for a few facts, I would certainly treat ''his last" as it deserves, with si- lence.
 In the first place, 1 would most respectfully remind w. P. ", that such clamor of rage, the lndiscrimi- nate use of hlghsounding epithets, spended superlatives and high-toned inyeetives, thrown together in such a conglomerated style, as is shown in his last article, contributes noth- ing whatever to the desired ends of true democracy.
 In the second place, I would re- mind W. P w, that he has, wilfully or otherwise, devlated considerably from what is correct in his attempted quotations from my former articles, in speaking of winch he says:
 "In one of his articles he says that lie doubts the practicability of the free pass law; in another he says that he does not doubt the practica- bility of such a law" and exulting iy refers to this as sample of my Hcontroverting assertions" Now, this assertion of W. r. w., under the semblance of a pretended quotation, that l have used such unqualified language, and made such "contro yerting assertions l dcnounce as positively false, and in substantia- tion of this Announcement 1 refer to my former articles.
 In the next place, W. P. w., says that he has, as yet, been unable to discover which side of the question we occupy! Alas Alas [! I am sorry indeed that my friend w. P. w, has authenticated such an ex- pression as this, and thus publicly announced tue fact of his destitute supply of cranial contents-or, per. haps, he has molllties cerebri and is eXcusable on that ground. In each of my former articles l have stated my position on the question" and my opinion upon the free pass" law just about as plainly as could be done with any words in the English language, and if he fails to discover which side we occupy, tis certainly no fault of ours; in this we pity rather than blame him.
 Now, as regards the rest of w. F. W's article, which upon the whole amounts to nothing but few unsup- ported and unsupportable assertions intermingled here and there with some intended derisiye alIusions to school. boy days and would-be sarcas- tie quotations from McGuflie's sec ond and third readers-and which, by the way, reflect discredit upon no one but their author-I will leave to gravitate by the weight of its own insigulticance to its proper position in the lowest depths of ob- liyion's dark abyss. Il any conclu- sion be drawn from the "heterolo- gus articles of Mr. W. r. w., the principles for which he would con- tend may be formulated into the fol lowing affirmative propositions;
 lst, That the giving of free passes" by the railroad companies to the makers and executors of the laws is the actual basis from which the former work, to extend and per petuate thelr monopolies.
 2nd. That the enactment of pro- hibitory free pass" law would effect ually "break up the said railroad and bonded ring monopolies, and result in equal taxation, just legis- lation and impartial execution of the laws, l am led to infer that this second proposition embodies w. r. W's sentiments, from the fact that, in speaking of the prohibitory free pass law, he refers to it as "the most wholesome law that could be enacted by any legislature"
 As a basis for the denial of the plausibiity of the affirmative propo. sitious of w, P. W.-which, howev. CT, are only implied, and not express ed by him-I vii! lay down the fol- lowing negative propositions;
 lst That the giving of free pass es is neither the only nor most of. fectual means to which the railroads can readily resort to influence legis. lation in their favor.
 2nd. That the enactment of pro- hibitory free pass" law would pro duce no material effect toward CD breaking up the railroad or bonded ring monopolics, CD securing equal taxation, wholesome legislation, or impartial execution of the laws.
 3d. That the only alternative is the election to office of men of known competency and answering integ- uty.
 Now, as l have contended for the principles inculcated by these prop estions in every article that I have written in this controversy, I feel very confident that the readers of the DEMOCRAT will readily deom my position as nearly proven as his-I certainly regard it as much more so.
 In conclusion Mir Editor, permit me to say that if w F. w., wishes to discuss the principles involved Tn the foregoing propositions according