River Falls journal. [volume] (River Falls, Pierce County, Wis.) 1872-2019, 1899-11-09
A Tempest in a Teapot.

An nnocent-intentioned paragraph
in the JOURNAL of last week seems to
have intensified the agitation among
the insurance agencies Of this city.
In defense Of the Truth some OF the
agents issued the following procla-
nation, which we publish entire with
out charge, giving them all the ad-
vantage The advertisement may bring:
INSURANCE TRUTHS,
IEr Us DEAL IN ACTUAL FACTS.
RIVER FALLS. WIS. Nov. 8, 1899.
To THE CITIZENS OF RIVER FALLS:
River Falls Journal says the Public school
was Insured in 1850 fol years at Sls5 aud the
rate now is 1895 for years. This is false. The
real rate on the Public School in 1855 was $3.50
for years and now il is only $40 for years.
The Journal also says that the rates have
been doubled since the water works have been
introduced, but the facts are, as the business
men know, that their rates have been reduced
on buildings excepting in eases where a gaso-
line engine has been placed in the building, as
in case of Journal Office. Insurance companies
have also allowed dwellings to be nearer to-
gether without extra charge.
This ''dodger," that has been dill
gently circulated all over the city, is
curious document. Why these little
advertising billsare called dodgers
we have never learned, but think
sometimes they are" dodgers"-as
far as the unvarnished truth is con-
cerned. They are always issued by
interested parties, with something
to sell. We have no interest in the
"war" except as a non-com Blatant re-
porter seeking news of the conflict.
Insurance Truths" may be great
moral question, but the aptness Of the
headline is not apparent in the con-
troversy. Did the au thors mean
facts" instead Of truths" If 50
they should ''stick to their text. Let
us deal in facts.a An excellent motto;
much better in its observation than
in its evasion; more effective in prac-
tice than hanging on the wall 'River
Falls Journal says the Public School
was insured in 1885 for years at 81 s.
and the rate now is 1896 for years. y
After making that absurd statement
the author was considerate enough to
acknowledge that what he had said
| was falseI The JOURNAL didn't say
| it. The authors of the dodger had
their attention called to the fact that
such statement had not appeared in
! the JOURNAL before they wrote it.
But man can prove anything If you
will allow him TO state his own premi-
| ses. We once heard Of colored
preacher who justified chicken steal
| ing from a text in the scripture found
| in EpheSians (: Is: LET him that
stole, steal" What the JOURNAL did
say may be found below If the dodger
had copied the paragraph as published
it would have been better evidence
of an intention to IDEAL in facts. )"
| The gist of the paragraph was that
| the people thought the union compan-
les had charged too much; that the
Northwestern had cut rates to one
third of what the union companies
had charged +; that rates were higher
| by reason Of comb ine after the water
service than they had been before. If
the circulators were earnest seekers
after truth and wished to deal only in
facts tho cut rates. why did they not
attack the article on its merits? Is
the contention correct That was
the question, rather than to make
''the citizens of River Falls believe
we had said something we did not say
and had no intention of saying "The
Journal says rates are now 1885,"
Didn't say so. To have made such a
statement would have been absurd,
and we should have been presuming
upon the ignorance OF business men
concerning their own business. Every
business man carries fire insurance
and he knows what premium he pays
and for US to have said he paid 1896
when he did not would have been an
absurdity.