The sun., 1901-12-09
LORD. HOW FOLKS LIE

Trying to save the remnants of II
wreck, the Evening journal returns to
it, attempt to prove that Mr.. Addcks
dcicd the viii Of the majority ut the
close OF fhc legislative session OF 1896
by commands ana threats issued 10 and
against the four men who voted for him
for United States Senator on the last
ballot or thnt session. A few days ago Il
said:
The four men who then dciiri the
fifteen did not persist III their course on
their own voltion, but NJ the command
aud under the threat or Addicks
In reply 10 the above we said:
I'VE know that the statement that Mr..
Addcks commanded. or controlled by
threats, tho votes Of the four men who
voted for him On the final vote In the
legislature ot 1895. IL absolutely false"
We repent Tint assertion. Whit the
Journal offers in rrhuttal does not in the
least effect the truth Of the statement
we have made. II now says that Fin
order to block the election of Il senator
he lMr. Addicksl secured written
pledge signed by each OF these four not
10 vote for any one else until the close
OF the session, and with this In his pos.
session Governor Watson took his seat In
the joint session.
or this matter WE have no personal
knowledge. II may be- true in part or
false in whole. In either case il does
Concc,ling that the pledge was secured"
was deposited. aud il now in existence.
ns the Journal asserts. what has that
got to do with tn" assertion that MIR.
AddickS controlled the votes nf the four
alleged sgncrs of the pledge. by "cnm,
mnnd and under thrrat?" And what
proof IL there that these four men did
not give the alleged pledge, ION their
own v"lition?" And having thus given
H. why should Commands nnd threats
hc necessary 10 assure good faith? But
suppose thcsr commands and threats IN
securing the pledge nnd compelling good
faith. were necessary. The Journal offers
no proof that Mr.. AddiekS either com
mnudrd or threatened II does not even
the four men during the session about
the alleged pledge. II ,locs say that Mr.,
Rohhins expressed regret fnr having
signed rlrlgr. and that h. begged
MIR, Nddicks to release him and "Ad
dicks stood firm" How delightful that
Is anl what fonl man would hr 10
accept that as evidence that Mr. All,
dicks controlled Mr.. Robbins vote hl
threat lnd command, Or course, MIR Al.
dh'ks stNul trm lie MAS right WhS
should liz shake, fall down or crawl out
cejlnE thlt he made our. was not mad,
with MI Nddcks hut with MIR Rob
htuS' tour colleagues What authority
hNd Nn Ntldieks "a release Mr. Rohbin,
without lln rousrnt aud corporation ol
has, hahhtus yollrngurs? His plea ~,
rrlra>g >hapll have hcrn made IL hi,
collrHs,,r~ liu there WAS nothing of /.
cnWw1wd Nv threat iii Mr. Addick>' dr
rlWNs n rcra>r Mr Rohhins ~
layton i yltrd IL witness and Nj,
testimony las ub>olu,rN lis relation I,
Ito matter N i>~ur What NJ ala, Il
Mhst NJ thoueht X that uulc. had uoth
us whatrNcr II to With tbr charge, tha
Mr \tittk> wG> sautr1lius TIL .up
porrr> w yowmaud> 5ui threats ~
spite tha nactgr'~ @Hwt8l" auxlty fG
,hN cicetnu y Srtatn Y iha, titur. 1
Is sail "tlaicA> wou't aot huisr'
Wuuirftul testimony ;hat. iii, uy !
mas n alright >a III IL I, rrttrs \
". llNtan's yondittyu 1T that Time, HI
mh.u n N, uamc x II, ;hat i so,l \
had, has i Il III w,th NJ Nd,ii,ks' +,
lSti"ns ,n Vi Ruhhn>3 Ii appears trr,
this ,,,sitmou> that MI Aidt,S> VA. ~,
f~th lalm ana >rlt possessed. III diia
hndsr THAT i rt>il ac9aun,sd fnr
the fast, ,hat whatrNrg occurred ii ii
cosius yots NJ thr >r>>iou hc wa> i,
either enmmauiins X ,hrca,run-
mcwher~ " tto Grm,r.,l S~>embl>
hrinsjns il ahaut rhr oNrr ~ cgmpr
nn>r madr far ,hc election 4 i Stpat
had NNrn uirr,rd and thr failure
el,ei moUld NET ~ chArEeahlr IN rith
hin VIZ his tr,cul> rhr nr>, wtur
is 4 PROMINENT LAWYER" This indiri
un lnnt Mr. Add,rks % allaw him
taNe mc~>asc trnm Mr. AdaicA> ta n
RnblHNs Nell Il ought M - withn
>aSrs shat Ntr A'ieA> refused L
rrtlNal may ldNo heon har,l au Z
"proniueu LAWYER" hu, tor Mr Aliiy
IL have fallen inta such 4 shallow IN
As that would have l4,cu VERY uullhc HI
IL >ay tho lta>, Hu; wha, has thu
fli>al NJ Mr Naditks 70 >rud mpS>a
q Nlt Rahhjn> h> premtnru; IA
ser to az with she ,hjus IN li~put
rha, REFUSAL Mas neither ,htyM uor
command aud III no Way addressed
either Il thc four men whom i, is all
NJ wrr,, crntr>u,I ~ commands 4
threats Mother prominent lawyer
said to harr sprrosth,d MIR, Adai,
W thr same question, ana q him Mr..
dicAS i allSS,d to have said: NO,
tKrhtiu>l stands hy ME ~ the last i
mcut N thr session" Rut where is
threat 81 command 10 anyhrty in nh
That is the whole story aGSlyzed, VIII
-