Bismarck weekly tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1884-1943, 1892-12-16
myself, but there are insinuations made
regarding some that no gentleman would

myself, but there are insinuations made
regarding some that no gentleman would
be guilty Of.
~
J.F. Philbrick: 1t would be a valua-
BILE document to preserve. I have been
mentioned before in nearly the same
manner. I do not think anyone, after
looking at the matter in his sober senses,
can approve of such a thing. 1t does
not bother me, personally.
~
One of the mentioned: Does the
omission of the name of the "owner of
the neglected COW" and the "town
bull" from the list on the "Salt river
ticket have any significance as to who
was the author, or one of the authors, o
the document 10 question?
49, ~
w. A. Falconer: I see they call me
Peggy. Well, it does not matter much
so far as I am concerned. I can not see
the object of the publication. It seems
to me the democrats got to feeling so
good they stopped over" What they
expect to gain by mud singing I cannot
see.
~
John G. Ritchey: I am a democrat
and an ardent one, but I do not approve
of such tactics as we're employed by the
authors of that circular. Had the cir
cular been gotten out before election
and no personal slurs been made it
would not have been so bad, but such a
thing as that was, and circulated a
month after election, is utterly wrong.
I desire to condemn the whole thing.
**x
Republican: I thought it was to be
a democratic celebration. Instead of
that see it was principally a roast on
good citizens of Bismarck. [ did not
thiak the democratic committee would
be guilty of such a thing-especially so
long after election. And that Doodle
sign. I saw at least four in that pro-
cession of democrats whom I'll bet will
not subscribe to any ridicule on "boodle"
each having been beneited-two
years ago-or later-more or less-said
about it, the better.
*
These are but a few of the opinions
which might be cited. The whole oc-
currence is deplorable, and is heartily
regretted, probably to a greater extent
by democrats than by republicans.
Who Is Responsible?
EDITOR TRIBUNE: Was the circular
distributed OF the street last evening a
part of the democratic program? Was
it prepared by and issued under the
sanction of the committee appointed to
take charge of the reception to the gov
ernor-elect?
It has been stated by members of said
committee that it was issued under it's
direction. The public has a right to
hold the committee responsible, under
the circumstances, until the contrary is
shown. It emanated from a low, de-
PRAYED and diseased mind. 1t is a
deliberate and premeditated insult to
many of the leading republicans of the
county. It is more than that. It con-
tains insinuations and ~innuendoes that
only a ghoul could express in such
manner. It is in keeping with the con-
duct of the vandals, who, on the occasion
Of the democratic jubilee recently held
in Southern Indiana, visited the ceme-
taries and defaced the tombstones of the
dead union soldiers by daubing them
with red paint. Who is responsible?
Let the committee speak. CITIZEN.
Barney Schwab Explains.
EDITOR TRIBUNE: AS a democrat and
chairman of the Burleigh county demo-
cratic central committee, I did not know
anything about the Salt river ticket
until next morning, and I do not be-
lleve any Of the central committee knew
anything about it. I do not want to
have the blame laid on the democratic