Emmons County record. [volume] (Williamsport, D.T. [i.e. N.D.]) 1884-current, 1907-04-25

The Eecyyd IL catered u ~ Listos feAs-
ace ~ secn1d-ct NAsess-
i'HE Record has ben pleased q.
frequent intervals 70 see the cle4r-cu.
manner fn which the Grand ForEs
Times has called down the Herald 81
the same city and shosH is hypocrisy
and untsuihlu,nesn But nsuApap<s
that throws stones siSo0ld not reside
ia house Of glass This remark IS
brought forth because u The fat .laas
the Times in q recent article made
some statements that are DOT 1.oog
the lines u aLSoiute verify. In An
article On The Initiative ADD RsfsYen-
s:ufn that PAPER h<gins with the sta;s
ment tina. Some 81 the democratic
organs u the state do 10. take kindly
~ tie opposition Of the Evening
Times 20 the initiatise-anc- resereI-
dun amendment. II the ID q " the
Times Is ~ impress the heIses upsn
It's readers that oniy democratic news
papers are favorable 10 the inpoTtan.
reform measure NAMED, it Is entirely
mtsiSken. Such suggestion Is mss-
leading ia The extreme A great many
u the STATE republican nesspapsn-
both anong the S,cz.i<d si1iuar.A
and the sO-czIyed Yefjsness-zle 10
favor " II. Ii is fsos = question sup
parted " opr1sed By ons Actin or
Linz ctises a. Unit
We Also demuf 10 an<eter s.a,snen.
~ the Times 10 s!se same astic.e-
which reads as fo,.o~s: An eIamIn-
alton VI the roII-ca!l of tfse legislature
viii kts0w that the people VITO had
st<cd for tkmpefzGcs and for strength
eninx the prssen. Iass voted against
tfse initiative and referendum bill.
~i'il The e1csrtiln q the democrats,
Hsa, gcted for ttse manure because it
Aas pzsty oas which the state demo
cratic conyention had Endorsed.
Iiis. Journal ~ the las, house u rep
rescntittyes lies before Tx as We are
writing. All the foll.calis are In the
journal. These denote that the Times
Is entirely mistaken. An analysis "
the vote will show this
When the Streeter resubmissi1n bill
was before the house there were 30
votes for IL and 81 against IL. Now.
instead Of showing that thAe who
stood for prohibition, as the Times
says, voted against the other proposed
constitutional amendment, the roll
call makes clear that d of the mem.
hers Who voted against resubmission
voted for the Initiative and rcferen-
dunn. Their names follow:
Anderson of Grand Forks. Law,
Blake. Platb.
huttz. Putnam.
Casey, steen.
chapman, Stevens.
Cunningham. Storey,
Garden. avendseld
Graham. svvertxon.
Iiallick, Treat
Johnson 0f Pcmhlaa. LELAND.
Johnson Of Ward. Walker,
Jones' OF Ransom. Wexford.
MIR. Speaker tTwichell).
mother words, nearly half OF those
who voted against resubmission voted
for the other proposed amendment.
Does this bear out the statement Of
the Times that .those who favor the
initiative and referendum amendment
to the state constitution favor result
mission?" Aud will the Times. un-
like the Herald when It's mistakes are
shown, acknowledge such mistake?
Now. Is to the democratic vote.
That vote was not, by any means, cast
as u unit for resubmission. On the
contrary. $ democrats voted for rcsub-
mission and against 1t, as follows:
FOr--Brotn0v, Connolly, Hanson.
NORM, Parkhill.
Against-Anderson of Grand Forks,
Casey, IIallick, johnson OF Pcmbina.
LELAND, Walker. Wexford.
We call the particular attention OF
the Times to the fact that Represent
alive LELAND, Ut LaMoure county, the
author Of the concurrent resolution
providing for the initiative and ref.
crcndum, cast his vote against rehub-
mission
Now, really. does the Times believe
that the above Items taken from the
house roll-caIls show that Those In
favor 81 the measure with the long
name lined up for rcsubmission ana
those opposed u IL on the opposite
side:
Again, When the leland measure
was first voted on in the hou4. and an
amendment made striking out the
conStltution-am Amending provision. the
writer and many other rcsubmjssion.
ISIS voted To pass II in It's amended
FORM, although Ia the shape 1t passed
inc house the first time IL gave the
people no opportunity u vote on the
prohibition OF any other constitutional
question under Its provisions.
The question VI the initiative and
referendum Is a much broader ?ropo.
sitlon than either prohibition az
license. 1t Is something that viii DO