The Russellville Democrat., 1882-06-29
Free Passes Again.


 quently with your permission we will III briel manner. notice to some ex tent few assertions made by c. A. F.. Tn his feioinder to our last article O. A. F., claims that he did not eN- pect to reply to our last article, bat for some reason which would hs ap. parent in the course of his communi cation, he found it necessary tn make q rejoinder.
 From the reading of friend C. A. r. g article, we, as well as many of the readers of the DEMOCRAT, have utterly failed to discover his appaF- eut reason; unless it WAS for tue pur pose of makln@ @4 attempt at dispi@y oi his school boy recita- tions of historical names. Our res ponse to this would be: Twinkle, twinkle, little star, how I wonder what yOu are, up above the world so high, like diamond in the sky" etc. etc. c. 4. F., says we so nicely beg the question, and so ingeniously turn the sense of his answer to our l former article into that which was not intended, that he hardly knew where or how to begin. We arc of the opinion from the reading oI his article, that he was eminen,ly cor rect in not knowing where or how to begln to answer our last article, for it does seem that he tailed alltogeth- CT in answering us at all. As to our begging the question, we are unable to discover any word or sentence in our last article that would impress such an idea on the mind of an un- biased reader. But on the other hand it is as transparent as glass, that G. 4. F., has begged the question from the very beginning, for it Is forcibly clear that he desires to dodge the question at issue by endeayoriug to carry water on both shoulders; this you will readily discover if you will but take the pains to read carefully his former articles.
 He claims that we would have you to believe that he was opposed to the free pass law. Now the gentle man certainly misunderstands us in this connection, from the simple fact that we have, as yet, been unable to 1 discover that he assumed to take either side of this question, but has made assertions here and there with out supporting any of them with good argument; for instance, in one of his articles he says he doubts the praCticability of the free pass law; in another article following, he says he does not doubt the practicability ot such law Sc Mr. Editor, you see from the gentleman's controverting assertions that he does not only beg the question, but is inconsistent in his argument.
 G. A. F., claims that lie is only seeking after knon ledge of the probable benefits of such law. If the gentleman wlll but refresh his memory on the late act of our gen eral assembly exempting tine rail road from paying taxes on their property 60 the detrIment of the good people of our state at large, and think for one moment by what inau- ence was thls impartial. shameful and diaboiical law enacted, he will readily discover the necessity of q prohibitory free pass law.
 He will also discover that the giv- ing and acceptance of a free pass is a prima fscia evidence of bribery ol the very worst kind.
 He says.he doubts the praeticabllity ol the law to convert q fool. a knaye or an unprincipled demagoguc into q patriotic statesman. If this is not begging the question by intro ducing argument which is altogcth- CT foreign to the subject matter m der discussion, we do not know what begging the question means. This assertion is so weak and pitia ble that we almost feel unwilling to 1 give it passing notice, for where is there an individual of common sense who would entertain an idea for a moment Of making honest statesmen of such characters here referred to- However, this is in Keeping with the gentleman arguments and it serves him very good purpose ot filling l out his reiOinder.
 G. A. F., declares that the late ] prohibition jaw is eyaded and that it has very little if sny-elect on those who want whiskey and have the money to buy it with. If this dec laratiOn be true (and VIC deny that it Is true, there seems to be very few who have the money to buy it with, or that the drunkards of our country have become suddenly very sober men, for it Is as clear as the monday sun that under the prohibit ton act We have scarcely no drunk enness and none of the crime and misery that it formerly engendered. We very much doubt the gentleman sustaining his assertion 0n this point. As to the law being eyadcd does not by any means signify that thc law cannot be enforced. or that it is not a wholesome law; are not all of our laws more or less cyadeit The laws against thciL bigamy, murder and many other things are eYaded to some extent. However VIC cannot .if ff.rI f4.