Daily capital journal. (Salem, Or.) 1896-1899, 1896-05-21
MORE ABOUT LABIsH.
Mr.. La Foiieu Makes Complete Re-
ply 70 Mr.. Jones.

ply 10 MI. JOtS"
EDITOR JouRNAL:--I see by the sa-
lem Post. OF the 18th, that j. b. Jones
launches forth his tirade OF abuse
against Mission Bottom people and
those that conscientlously see ft TO
stand with us.In the first place he says
In 1892 there was many changes made
in precinct lines, Lablsh among the
rest. Now, In Saturdays Statesman,
OF May 9th, Mr.. Eblcn comes out 10 a
card, giving the true boundaries OF
Labish precint. The boundaries we
claim, and he says over his own Sig
nature, after tracing carefully the
county court proceedings, 81 find no
changes having been made In Lablsh
precinct. since 1885" Now, j. b.
Jones says there was. Mr.. Ehlen say
there was not. ] will leave the peo-
pie Of Marion county TO Judge, who
tells the truth. Mr.. Ehlen has no in
terest in the matter. Mr.. Ehlen
farther says, ~ find that the south
ern boundary of Geryals precinct,
which seems to be the main grounds
of contention, comedies at every
point, with the northern boundary OF
Labish precinct, as established In
1885," aud Mr.. Eblen Furthermore
says: "Flndlng as ] do, that the pro-
ceedlngs OF the court, both at It's
January session OF 1888 and 1892, are
duly signed, by the Judge and commits
sloncrs OF the said court, ut the said
terms, there Is no necessity, think.
for further controversy, as 10 the true
boundary in question" Now, Mr..
Jones don't bring forth one scintllla
OF evidence that he Is correct Why
don't he bring In the evidence Of the
Judge or commissioners that there
was change made Mr.. Watson says
there WAS no change made. Mr.. Jones
further tries to legallze those voting
out OF the precinct, by saying that
they had been voting there. But i
think, whenever n man or set OF men
set up claim In defiance OF the rec
Ords of the court, think the people
win sit down on such work pretty
hard.
Mr.. Jones says our boundary claim
hangs on very slim technicallty.
Now, | will say to the people OF Ma
rlon county, that that Is more check
than ever supposed any man had.
To make such statement In the face
of the records OF Marion county, and
the statement OF Mr., Ehlen, that he
can see no more cause for controversy
In regard TO Lablsh precinct lines, !
say for impudence and cheek, that
would put "A government mule "a
shame! The Post says, "where Inn
pudence is wit, tits folly TO reply
So this is the last the people OF this
county will ever hear from me, In re-
gard TO precinct lines, the correctness
d which, | leave 10 u dlslnterested
public 10 Judge.
Mr.. Jones says, as TO the judges OF
1864, IL was mutually agreed that our
election should be by ballot. The
cycles OF time have been laundering
along for ~ years, since then
aud, as look back through
the dim vista 'of time, uothing
calls TO my mind any thing relating
TO the subject In controversy, so | sup
pose Mr. Jones has got so befuddled
over precinct lines, that he gets
mentally unbalanced, aud is not
reponsible for what he say, aud
think he mnst have been In one OF
those moods when he wrote his last
article, the way he got things mixeG
up. Now in regard TO me naming $
A. Jones rs Judge two years ago, he 1,
mistaken. NJ. l.. Jones, and had ,
talk about the matter. Mr.. w. z
Massey being not far OF l named hin
NJ. l.. Jones says lets put Silas Jone'
In for he Is notary aud II will b,
legal for him TO swear the voters 4
necessary and / agreed 20 IL, We ais,
named Mr.. Perkins You say sneer
ingly reply To S. A. Jones AS one OF Tn,
judges, You throwed the first stone
you attacked Il. X, Shaw and A. G
Perkins, called them corrupt ant
designated our side as the corrup
minority, yet you say the Mission