Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-09-14
TIE MILK IN THE CoCoANur.
Why tee $4,000 H's,se5or.- HosIt1ars. Or
gc!. Opposes Kindred.


Crookston ChIonicie-Rep.,
The St. Vincent Herald OF the 4th inst.
closes an article replying to an unfair anC
| u11warranted attack on that paper by The
Pioneer Press, in the following language
We want TO see man in Office who carro
be hu!hed into paying tribute TO the Pioaeei
Press ny It's vltlpersltlve and blackEuailing at.
tacks. AID Il We can succeed IN attaining such
desirable results we shall feel abundantly repaid
Tor the trlfe we have contributed 10 Us accom-
pishmept-'
Now it Is openly charged. and believed
by al who gre familiar with the peculiar
methods OF the Pioneer Press, that Mr..
Hundreds refusal TO subsidize that paper
IS the reason, and the only reason that
moves the editor 10 SANDER and vilIify Mr..
Kindred. The charge IN plain words, as
it is told 10 Us, IS thus: Mr.. Driscol. the
manager, asked Mr.. Kindred TO send 10
600 copies OF the weekly Pioneer
Press to voters in the Fifth district during
tke campaign This was asked during the
time when the paper was decidedly favor
able 10 the Kindred side OF the fight Mr.
Kindred refused 70 comply with the re-
quest, upon which the Pioneer Press
opened its batteries anon him. and have
continued ever since to SANDER and mis-
represent him. Now every old citizen Of
Minnesota knows, or preten6s to know.
that the Pioneer Press, in all controversies
OF any importance, viii be found on the
side Of the party which responds to- their
request either for official or business pat
ronage. This being the case, it is q wo2-
der 10 Is that SO many Of the papers Of the
state, IN the district and ont of it. should
quote the Pioneer Press as authority on
any question where there is q chance of a
stake being made.
Personally we do not pretend to know
that the course Of the Pionccg' Press in this
campaign has been as charged, but we do
know that during the whole time, when, as
is now alleged, Mr.. Kindred was doing IN
fair work. before the Detroit convention.
that paper was favorable to his candidacy.
We further know that Mr.. Kindred's his
tory and his suits with the Northern Pacific
railroad were as well and fully known TO
the editor and manager of the Pioneer
Press IS they ere now. Then they saw no
reason for opposing him, but on the con-
trary, supported him. Why this change
Il is not charged that Mr.. Kindred has
done anything since the Detroit convention
that is TO his discredit or dishonor. IF he
has done anything dishonorable, it was
done before the Detroit convention. Then
there must be motive for trying to de-
base what before they exalted, of trying to
pan down what before they tried to build
up. And what IS the motive? It looks
very much as if the refusal to pay tribute
to the Pioneer Press was the sole cause OF
the opposition Of that paper. If SO, then
what weight should its attacks have with
the voters Of this district, with whose af-
fairs that paper has no business? We ad-
wise ali who have been preiudiced by the
articles OF the Pioneer Press, TO look at the
matter n q common sense light, and ask
themselves why Mr.. Kindred would have
been better man for q member Of con-
gress from the Fifth district of Minnesota,
if he had paid for 10000 copies OF the
Pioneer Press for three months