The twice=a=week herald. (Amarillo, Tex.) 1887-1906, 1906-06-26


personal views on the subject and
did not, directly or indirectly, refer
to Senator Decker, personally, nor
to his position on the question of
local option. believed that if he
was on the anti side Of that ques-
ton, he had perfect right to be
and that it was no concern of mine.
| knew then that he voted for the
Willacy bill in the 28th Legislature
(Senate Journal PIP. 229-229),
which had for its object the de-
struction of the efficacy of the local
option law in Texas, and supposed
every intelligent observer of cur
rent legislative affairs was cogni-
zant of such fact.
In reply to my address, after he
reached the prohibition question
and said, John Veale nor |, have
any right to throw stones at each
other" on the prohibition question
ard seemingly in explanation of the
statement, said in substance, that
in 1901. after local option was
adopted in Amarillo didn't let the
ink get drV on the paper before |
was busy with an injunction to stop
its going into effect" etc. re-
piled in rejoinder that at the time
referred to by him was, and had
been for years associated with the
late Judge W. B, Plemons, former
| ly Of Henrietta, Texas, in the prac-
tice of law under the firm name of
Plemons 81 Veale; | said that Judge
Plemons was not in sympathy with
local option, and was an anti on that
question; | said that on the day be-
fore our local option election in
Potter county, Judge Plemons was
stricken and died; said that be-
fore his death he had accepted
from the liquor dealers of Amarillo
: retainer engaging the firm of
Plemons g. Veale to represent them
in any litigation they might have
growing out Of the approaching pro-
hibition election. | explained that
after his death and after the cleo
ton, these men came to me and
demanded a fulfillment of Judge
i Plemons' contract with them, by
myself as his surviving partneri
l complaining that the election was
unfair to them. Under the circum-
stances, could see nothing left for
me to do but to carry out the
j agreement Of my deceased partner
5 in good faith. did so to the best
of my ability as a lawyer. Such,
briefly stated, was my connection
with this matter; can see nothing
discreditable in my conduct, and
that the public may judge Of how
my friends and neighbors viewed
the situation then and now, and
who were here in 1901, and thor
oughly in touch with the situation
in all its details, reference is here
made to the accompanying state
ment this day prepared and handed
1 me by them for thepublic along
with this communication. 1t will
be observed that this statement is
h signed by some Of the leading bank
ers, business men, farmers and min
listers of the Gospel in this city
d who for the most part we're and are
8 leading prohibitionists in our city
u Senator Decker's statement thai
9 John Veale, nor |, have any right
' to throw stones ION the prohibition
: question: at each other" presume
g was meant as a confession on hi'
p part that he differed with me OF
u that issue and was on the anti sidt
r Of that question. certainly have
n no quarrel to make with him be
l. cause he is not in harmony will
J. our local option laws, nor do de-
10 ny his right to support and vote thu
10 anti ticket in local option elections
i nor have | impugned his motive il
d voting for the Willacy bill in tn,
D Senate Of 1908; although ! woulC
W not have voted for such a bill my
" self had been in the Senate,
r. could not therefore understand VIII,
r he referred to the question at Gle
l. in the manner he did and why hi,