Warren sheaf. [volume] (Warren, Marshall County, Minn.) 1880-current, 1898-11-03
In this weeks Register. Mr.. Os-

i In this weeks Register Mr.. Os
/ from, democratic candidate fOrstate
1senator, ATTEMPTS to reply to our
I.criticism in last weeks SHEAF as to
his Incorrect and unfair comments
on the Anderson bill 1t amounts
really to an admission that he was
wrong but is ende;lvoring to crawl
out of the hole by making some ref
erence to the unseating OF sena tor
Frank Day. Mr.. Ostrom says: "He
omits to tell how the last republican
state senate. at the dictstion uf the
railroad corporations nf the state,
deliberately voted Senator Frank
Day out Of the senate, after they
We're warned that to do so would en-
danger the validity OF the Anderson
law, and how tile Great Northern
afterwards contested the law on the
ground that Mr.. Day lla0 been ex-
pelled from the senate and was not
entitled to vote" This statement
bristles with errors. In the first
place tire law was not contested on
the point that the voting OF Frank
Day out OF the SENATE in 1897 would
endanger the validity of he Ander-
son law passed in 1895. The parti-
cular point raised by the railroad
corporations in that regard is that
the act OF Day in accepting the office
of Lieutenant Governor, ipso facto,
terminated his term us sena tor, an d
hence his vote as senator On the An
derson bill was invalid. This took
place during the 1895 term of the
legislature. Now how it is possible
that any act OF the subsequent legis-
lature of 1897 could possibly affect
the legality or illegality of the legis-
lature Of 1895 cam not be answered.
1t could not be done. Had Mr.. Day
been unseated the next minute after
his vote on the Anderson bill that
act would not have ffected his vote
on the bill. His present status was
already fixed and it was pure mat
ter OF law whether it were possible
for him to occupy the two Offices at
once. Had he never been -unseated.
the railway corporations could
equally as well have questioned his
right to vote as senator. The
charge that the railroad dictated the
unseating OF Day is mere assumption
on his part and has no foundation
in truth. His seating or unseating,
as we have shown, did not affect
their case a particle. Mr.. Ostrom
also falsely asserts that the repub-
lican party has dropped all known
friends of the law from their state
ticket, and that such men as Judge
Collins and Attorney Childs Nere
dropped from their state ticket be-
cause they dared to uphold the peo-
ple's rights. Now what are the facts?
Attorney General ChiIds was not a
candidate for reelection but in his
place the republicans nominated
Hon, w. b. Douglass, Of Moorhead,
another staunch friend and champion
OF the Anderson law, and as to
Judge Collins, he was notnominated
for governor to be sure, but was re-
tanned in his position as Judge where
he will have an opportunity to rem
der more such good decisions as he
did on the Anderson BILL No, Mr..
Ostrom, you are unnecessarily
alarmed over the fate Of the Ander-
son law The republicans will care
fully guard it from the attacks OF
Jim Hill and other democrats.
IdsDARL's workers are resorting
to all sorts of lies and misrepresent-
i q <;r,v, ~ Sr1.,f.,o% T,,1n.n G~;n nlnn1