Mineral Point tribune. (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1869-1938, 1884-10-23
As to Clearing False Witness. "

The following letter explains IL
self;
! To THE EDrroR:-In your paper Of Oct. l6,
| 1884. is an editorial concerning myself, entitled
bearing false witness" You quote from the
| state Journal Of Oct TO-
! The State Journal of Oct. II contains my UNI
qualified denial of all the statements in the ar
ticle from which you quote. In this denial is
found the following statement; II deny that |
have ever stated that Mr.. LaFollettes work in
prosecuting the saloon keepers Of the city of
Madison was "farcical" On the contrary, ]
have always said that he faithfully performed
his duty as district attorney in these cases"
Was not this denial know to you at the time
you quoted from the journal, and did you not
Intentionally omit TO mention Of Il?
Since you go on further to state what said
concerning Mr. LaFolette in your city and
W hat was fairly implied by my statements,
will state exactly what have said about MIR.
LaFollette, regretting that your abusive editor
inl should make this public statement neces-
sary.
In the first place am net conscious of hav-
ing made any statements whatever in your city
concerning Mr.. LaFollette may have done
so or / may not; but whatever have said has
been uecessitated by the action of MrLaFolletts
friends if not by tho action of himself. 1t has
been studiously circulated throughout this
congressional district by Mr.LaIolletts friends,
If not 10y himself that MIR, LaFollett was not
only proper candidate for temperance Repub-
Leans to vote for, but should have been en-
dorsed by the Prohibition party, and should
now be supported by the votes of Prohibition
lists. These views, on being represented to me,
have been met by me in private conversation
by statements which are strictly true-that
Mr. LaFolette does not claim TO be Prohibit
ZIONIST and had two years ago refused an en-
dorsemcnt by that party; that he was not
temperance man, since he drank his glass of
beer at Il saloon when he wished IT. and since
he treated others TO liquor at saloons. This is
the most that have ever said against Mr. La
Toilette as a temperance candidate. ! have
never said or implied that nc was incorporate
IN his use of liquor; nor have | ever in. any
public speech discussed Mr.. LaEolette's posi-
tion on the temperance question, as is the GUS
tom to discuss the position of opposing cand-
dates upon the issues between the different
parties, cxceptingin meeting at Monroe when
a statement similar TO the above was called
forth by the editor of the Monroe Sentinel.
JOHN NJ. OLIN.
Mr.. Oliu's denial was not known
to us at the time we quoted from
the State journal And we take
pleasure in giving him the benefit Of
| it in this our first issue after it has
come to our notice.
With regard to what MIR. DIN
has said in this city and elsewhere
in relation to Mr. LaFolette's hab-
its, there appears no need OF amend
ment Mr.. DIN has at different
times and places throughout the
district, with apparent iutent, and
certainly with effect, spoken of Mr..
LaFolette in such way as to leave
an i'm preston that he is not a strict.
Is temperate man. At least, Mir
DIN is quoted 10y those who make
such statements, in the interest of
himself or MIR. Jones.
Mr.. Olin says he has been neces-
STATED to refer to Mr.. LaFolette's
hahits by the claims of his friends
that be is a eft man for temperance
Republicans to vote for Does not
that imply that Mr.. DIN regards him
an unfit man for Temperance Re
pubicans to vote for and does it
not justify the complaint that Mr..
/ DIN practically clears false witness
10y statements which are construed,
naturally, to mean, that Mr. LaFol.
tie is . trequeuter Of saloons
Mr.. DIN says truly that Mr. La
Toilette is not Prohibitionist. as
the term is understood in politics !;
D but when he says he is not "tem-
perauce maa" he "forces the fight
! Ing" beyond the point of fairness
To his mind "Prohbjtionist' and
a Temperance mau' may be syuony
nous terms, but ordinarily they are
not so understood, and that in part
no doubt accounts FOR the stories
which siugularlytollow MrOin from
place to place that "AIr. LaFolIette
is an incorporate man."
If anybody claims that Mr.. La
Toilette should have been endorsed
by the third party Prohibition con.
vention because he is in sympathy
with that method of laboring for
temperance, it is without authority,
aud too apparently silly for consid-
Grafton.
J Nobody reports Mr. DIN as re,
/ ferring to Mr.. Jones habits or sen
e timents relating to temperance.
r Why is this? Mr.. Jones is also q