The Denison review. [volume] (Denison, Iowa) 1867-current, 1903-09-30

ledge their mistake honestly and candl-
dly, and with the specious excuse Una.
::'they would not do it again neztyear.
The Bulletin does not tell that III
January last the board passed the LEY
ember bill at the illegal rate, and tnae
at the time every member OF the poara
was fully advised of the illegallty Oh
the proceeding, The Bulletin says
nothing of the promise OF one OF the
members of the board now asking re-
election, that the money woulo
be repaid in February if the REVIEW
would consent not to publish the facts
before that time that the REVIEW did
wait to give the board an oppor-
tunity Ito square itself, and that
the board met three times and did
nothing. The Bulletin does not tell
that at first the officers laughed at the
idea of repayment. There is not
man in the county who believes the
money would ever have been repaid
had not the REVIEW made such fuss
about it.
AS to the Bulletins attack upon Maar.
S. V. O'Hare who was county attorney
at the time the Bulletin says the board
was so greatly in need of advice, it is
purely democratic row, and the RE
VIEW has nothing to say, except to
state that Mr.. O'Hare afirms that his
ADVICE was never asked on the subject,
and to call attention to the fact that in
spite of his incompetency as now urged
by the Bulletin, that his paper support
ed him both for denomination and re-
election last fall. Its support may
have been half hearted, but if he was
as incompetent as the Bulletin now
asserts it should not have supported
him in any way and should have plain
| ly stated to the people that he was in
competent and advised against his
election. The Bulletin will say that its
duty as party organ prevented it from
/ telling the truth as it saw it but The
people will ask if the Bulletin is not
following the same course this yea1
and supporting known incompetents
because they are on the democratic
ticket?
All the knowledge the REVIEW has
J Of the alleged repayment is the state
ment made by the Bulletin. 1t may
be true, even the Bulletin would hardly
dare make such statement were il
not, we would ask the Bulletin to be
more specific. What amount was re
paid? When was it repaid? Did the
sheriff repay the money and did he re
pay the legal rate of interest for the
time he held the money wrongfully;
That would be only fair and just. Die
nothing of the four democrats. 1t say
he do it? The Bulletin il
on the best of terms with tn
Bond-sale Kuhl will it not obtain ant
publish the exact facts for the benifi
of the people? No one can suppose TO
moment that the Review would hav
stated that no payment had been mad
had it be5n advised to the contrary, al
the evidence points to the fact that thu
repayment, if any, was made quietl,
aud withheld as one of the man,
state secrets" of this best managed
unity in Iowa, in order to mislead
Even the Bulletin either knew nothing
about it or suppressed the facts 70
weeks The Review has nothing t
regret in its counse as to this matter
BY it's persistence it has forced tn
officials to act honestly with the peopl
and it has SHOWN t. the people by fact
and figures the carelessness and incon
! potency of those officers who are swor
1 to protect the money of the people.
n i.., M IN tinOpr