Mower County transcript. [volume] (Lansing, Minn.) 1868-1915, 1889-08-07
+ Nm ASEIlsJRN q GORDON.
@ pROpRIEToRs.
EnoM THIS fsN,Gurs or LABOR
To the Editors of the TRANSCRIPT:

FROM THE kNaGHIs or LABOR.
To the Editors of the TRANSCRIPT:
The article concerning the lecture of
Mr. i, FL Lucas, OF Minneanolis> Mimi,
published in your last weeks issue has
attracted our attentions. The TRANSCRIPT
says the speaker said vote, but failed to
state whom or What for We will have
to aid the memory of the Editorsof the
TRaNsoHlPp, who has not either under,
stood the lecture, OF wishes to mislnform
the public. that Mr., Lucas said, vote for
the man who above hisown signature has
pledged himself to support our preamble"
Very likely the Editor of the IRAN
SCRIPT never saw the preamble OF the 4.
Of L. order. He acknowledges that the
lawyers and Jaw Gould deserve the roast
ing. This shows that Mr.. Lucas had rea-
son to find fault with a system Of govern
ment which allows one man to accumu-
late such an enormous capital as to threat
en- the public welfare. Now if Mr.. Lucas
did not suggest any reasonable remedy,
which he did by referring to the follow,
ing remedies given in our preamble, viz:
Education Of the laboring class, abolition
of Land, Transportation and Money mo-
nopohes. Why don't the TRANSCRIPT
who acknowledges that faultcan be found,
make Oettef SugScSLlOnI ,g..a. il .1- e.
If the TRANSCRIPT has no use for the
man who is going about enlightening the
public on public evils, and suggesting
L., have no use for the TRANSCRIPT, be-
cause they misinformed the public
about the recent lecture.
All we ask of you is to retract that ar
tlcle for the reasons given above.
NoN,>s1rrEr or X ONT
We are much Obliged to the K. of L.
Committee for the attention which they
give our article, We are always pleased
to hear from people who differ from the
views which we express.
We understood that Mr.. Lucas was to
deliver lecture to the public, and went
there to listen and learn and criticise OF
praise as member of, that public. We
no doubt lost much from not being famil-
lar with the principles of faith of the or
der to which the speaker belongs, but the
public were entitled to a speech free
enough from technicalities and vague ref
erences to be understood. The speaker
may have SAID ''vote for the man who
pledges himself to support our preambles'
and that may have been expressive enough
to catch the attention of Knight of La
Dor, but 1t did not catch ours. We at
tended the lecture expecting to hear an
explanation of the views and ''preambles'
OF the labor party.
1t is an old story that lawyers are
knaves. We have heard that all farmers
are dishonest and that you can depend on
no laborlng man when your back is turn
ed. We have all known lawyers who in
variably forget to state the law on the
other side Of the case; there are farmers
without doubt whose best fruit or butter
is Oh top in the packages that go to mar
ket. and whose sacks of grain have all
the screenings in the middle; and there
are hosts of working men whose pace is
not accelerated when the employers back
is turned. TO say that all, of any of these
classes are rogues, may be very divertlng,
but it is also very foolish. There are a
great many honest, upright lawyers, and
"A%h q puDi1S SpCdNCI 14ht NIL LuCdS,
spends large part of his time telling that
they are all rogues and should be gotten
rid of at once, he shows very poor judy
ment If nothing worse.
The TRANSCRIPT does not feel called
upon to give that ''better suggestion
as it does not set itself up as lecturer
on the subject. If 1t did, its duty would
be to give that reasonable remedy"
No one in the world has any more use
than the TRANSCRIPT for the "man who
goes about enlighting the public on pub
he evils and suggesting very reasonable
remedies, we described member of a very
different class and are surprised to find the
Knights of Labor attempting to place
themselves in it. If they belong there
wo cannot quarrel with them for having
no use" for the TRANSCRIPT.