The state herald. (Holyoke, Logan County, Colo.) 1887-1921, 1895-05-10

versy, ns to attack any man on his churcl
membership or religious life and We
shall not do 30 in this case. We ar,
probably as we'll known in this county
as Judge Robinson and tho readers OF
his article, by contrasting this language
Of his with his language in speaking Of
us before we were announced MS can
didate for the nomination .or senator can
easily account for his use Of it in his
last weeks article. 1t would seem that
since the senatorial convention he has
not had very friendly feelings toward US
and that his last weeks reiiaed effusion
Is simply tumultuous boiling over Of
his pent-up wrath. In his last weeks
article he continues his scheme OF Jug
Cling with the county records in his des-
perate effort TO make it appear that his
attack upon us has romc foundation in
fact. In answer to our statement that
he had falsiied the records IN giving
what he claims we had received for
county printing during ths first three
months of the yenr by including in his
figures the pay for publishing the tax
list which was done in 1891, he says, 81
do not know when the work was done."
We suppose he ina zines that this con-
fession OF ignorance will relieve him
from the odium Of publishing willful
lie, but il would require a somewhat pc
culiar line OF reasoning to arrive at such
CONCLUSION. He intended that his
readers should understand that his
statement correspondcd exactly with the
record but, when caught in falsiiiea-
tion OF the records, he pleads ignorance.
He examined the records before making
his statement RS is shown by the fact
that he gave the amount Of the bills al.
lowed and it follows that his falsiiicaton
Of the records was knowingly end will
fully mnde, for tho record Of tho nllow-
ance OF the bill which included the pay
for publishing the tax list contains the
words, "for publishing delinquent Tux
list," work which no well knew was done
in the yenr 1891. This Is n fair sample
OF his juggling with the records TO make
what he considers n point in his favor
and shows very plainly that he is despcr-
ate in his mainess. In his last weeks
article ho follows up his former misrep'
resentation OF the records by n similar
misrepresentation IN regard to money
that had been received by us for county
printing done IN the year 1894. His fig
ures include the pay for the tax list oi
1888, but he represents to his readers
that il was all for work done in 1891
He also forgets to inform his readers
that the tax list OF 1894 was the larges,
list ever published in this county and
that the county printing expense inelud
ed the expense OF the state election
printing. He also neglected to tell them
that the publication of tax list. is moi
pad for ont Of the tax levy. Jndge Rob
inson's explanation of when he spen,
three months and s75 In cash TO help no.
cure mid for the farmers in the crop fail.
nre OF 1880 rs very decidedly indefinite
All the explanation ho offers is when he
says, at was in ls90 that tho crop failed
and the winter Of 1890 aud 1891 that the
lid was secured as is well known" Nc
one questions this fact, but very probn.
bly, somewhat more specific statement
would better satisfy those who have no