The Black Hills union. [volume] (Rapid City, Pennington County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1889-1904, 1902-01-31
Why NotTell the Truth?

HoSe VINO are going TO Ghe defense
OF w. II. Tompkins, late superintend-
ent of the reform school, on the ground
that he left his predecessor alone when
the latter was fred from the institu-
tion, are short on memory. Tompkins
alleged all sorts of thing about Aims
worth. from keeping books on the barn
door to swipiug a lot OF cattle from the
let of these things on the strength of
what Tompkins dug up, and if the lat
ter is guilty Of immoral practices in re-
latien to the girl inmates of the school,
I his friends should not try to do the bas
by act OH his account. 1t is hard to
believe that Tompkins or any other
man in the position would be guilty of
the offenses charged, but good, reliable
witnesses say it is SO, and until Mr..
Tompklns controverts their testimony
he will have to labor under the dis
grace. Pierre Free Press.
Why is it that such sheets as the
Free Press persist III lying when
the truth would do just as we'll, or
perhaps better? Tompkins never
alleged" anything "about Aims
worth when that barn-door repub-
lican statesman retired. That the
school had been mis-managed by
Ainsworth and that its affairs were
in deplorable condition when he
retired is fact we'll known through
out the entire state. This condition
called for an investigation-anot
er fact. The Investigation was
made, but it was not of the star
chamber order, as was the one of
few weeks ago. Ainsworth was Civ
en- hearing and an opportunity to
explain certain irregularities, dis
crepanc;es and questionable trans.
actions which had characterized his
administration. Why was not Mr..
Tompkins accorded the same courte-
sy,. instead of being tried, convicted
and sentenced by a clique of five re-
publican hangers-on before he even
knew that an investigation was be-
4 ing made? Will the Free Press an
swer this question? And why was
the populist member of the state
board-a friend of the accused -.xypt
& in total ignorance of the wtlole af-
fair? Will the Free Press tell us
this?
And. lest.we forget, there were
charges of immortality made against
the man Of barn-door celebrity also,
by the girl inmates of the school,
Little attention was paid to them,
{ however, for their authors were
very properly considered irresponsi-
ble characters and not shining exam
Piles Of truth and veracity. Those
charges were similar to the ones
made against Tompkins both came
from :denticaIly the same worthless
and irresponsible sources. Tomp-
kins disposition Of the charges
against his predecessor was the act
Y Of a MAN. The action Of the present
superin tendent:of the school and his
four political aides is that Of a gang
4 s8of political asses, loaded to the limit
with narrow prejudice and personal
malice there's the difference in the
"a two cases.
Superintendent S. q. Young does
not believe the charges against Mr..
Tompkins, in the opinion Of The
Union. Neither do the four repub-
lican members Of the state board Of
charities and corrections who had a
y hand in that star cham Der fasco.
Neither does the Pierre Free Press.
n Yet itsrefers to the good, reliable
Witnesses who assert the truth Of
!, the charges made. Will it name a
few Of these good, reliable witness
es to which il refers? We guess
4 & not Z MA
Let papers Of the Press variety
stick to the truth once in awhile,
just for the novelty Of the thing.
Such a change would be a radical
departure, but they might get used
to it after awhile.
\ Long, 6. Fence. q
l. f,f "a ease W II Je.