The Montgomery tribune. (Montgomery City, Mo.) 1892-1910, 1902-05-16

creating new debts III the same manner,
whenever they find moneys in the school
treasury subject to removal.
The issue then is clear, so far as the
republican and its obvious policy are con-
cerned. Being against the amendment of
the constitution on Bourbon lines, it is log
ically against perpetuating the law of 1883.
And out of this necessary attitude grow some
interesting questions. The Republican
county central committee of Stoddard coun-
ty met a few days ago and took action Oh one
of these. At the meeting the following
statement and protest was adopted:
Whereas, 1t appears from the House
Journal of the Missouri Legislature for the
year 1888, at page 1913 of said Journal that
Hon. Moses Whybark, then a member
of said Legislature from the county of
Bollinger and now n candidate for one of the
republican nominations for Supreme Judge
of Missouri, voted for the passage of the law
of 1888, by and through which the School
and Seminary Funds of the state have been
plundered of the cash money properly be-
long to said funds and, which said law, is
found ut page 1870 of the Session Laws of
1888, and
Whereas, The democratic State Audi
tor of Missouri in in his report to the Gov
ernor of the expend iture of public moneys for
the year ending December the 3lst. 1901
ut page 80 of said report cites the vote OF
said Hon. Moses Whybark in favor of said
luN, a., ,n1tiE,otinn bnth az ;ta g.n and
the subsequent unconstitutional diversion OF
the money belonging to said funds, and
Whereas, The Republican party of Mis-,
souri,. in the two last campaigns have con
demned in emphatic terms in the press and oi
the stump said unlawful diversion of tn,
money and securities belonging to the Schoo
aud Seminary Fund.
Therefore, To the end that the fact
may he generally known so far rs the Hon
Moses Whybark connection with the pas
sage of said law is concerned aud to prevent
it possible the qualification of the party il
the event of his nomination the above fact
: are recitcd and we, the legally constitute
representatives of the two thousand loyal ro
publicans of Stoddard county, respectful
protest against his nomination.
The ability and high character. rs we
{ ms the popularity of Judge Whybark, max
= this n most difficult and embarrassing situa
{ ton. The state Republican will not, Il
= ut this time, express any definite opinion Il
4 to the ACCESSIBILITY of dominating Judge Why
5 bark. 1t has no hesitation in saying, how
ever, that it is Mohamet which should com
g to the mountain. The mountain cannot Q
$ to Mahomet. The position of the party o
!. this question, for this campaign, is fixe
i and irrevocable. If nominated, Judg
Whybark will be u candidate before the pa,
pie of the state on Il platform condemnator
@ of u policy with which he is understood to |
identified. lie should put himself in accor
J. with the party. If he does not, and if /
l. could be nominated without so doing, |
l. would defeat not only himself, but his cal
d didacy would make the election of any pa
= of the ticket impossible.
1t is inconceivable that any of the X
n publicans who voted for the law of 1883 a
now in favor of amending the constitute
> to perpetuate that evil statute, after II
Is abuse of power possible under it has be,