The evening times. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1906-1914, 1907-04-29
&|@{sH Co.,
THE LEGISLATIVE RECORDS.

lions the reliability of some of the
statements of the Evening Times in
refernce to the initiative and refer
endum amendment TO the constitu-
ton, and asks if the Times is fair
enough to admit its mistake when
shown. The Times replies, not for the
purpose of engaging in a newspaper
quarrel, but because the people of the
state are desirous of securing all the
information possible on the proposed
amendment and because newspaper
discussion of the same upon the mer-
its of the case and devoid of person
ality and abuse will largely serve
that purpose.
The Evening Times is not in favor
of resubmission. The Record is.
Therein they differ. The editor OF the
Record is a man OF ability, has been
a member of the legislature for two
terms, and is honest and candid in
his belief. Nor can it be charged that
he advocates resubmission in order to
debauch the citizenry. On the con-
trary, he believes that the methods
which he advocates will serve to bet
ter control the whiskey evil than is
now possible under the present law.
His advocacy is therefore not demo-
goguery.
Nevertheless the Evening Times
differs from his editorial opinion on
the initiative and referendum bill. But
being the work OF human agency, the
Times is liable to err and if shown its
error is not only willing but glad to
correct the same. Moreover, if it can
be shown that any form of control of
the liquor traffic is better than the
present one, the Times is ready to
accept it. But until conclusive evil
dence is produced that a saloon on
every corner clothed by law with
semblance Of legality will serve as
stronger check upon the formation
and continuance of the drink habit
than the dirty novels where it is now
sold, If at all, whose owners are pub
lie branded criminals living in con-
slant terror of the law, We are OPP
posed to the change.
The Record says:
We also demur to another statement
by the Times in the same article,
which reads as follows: "An examin-
alton Ofthe roll-call of the legislature
will show that the people who had
stood for temperance and for strength
ening the present laws voted against
the initiative and referendum bill,
with the exception of the democrats,
who voted for the measure because it
was party one which the state DEM
ocratic convention had indorsed." The
journal Of the last house of repre-
sentatives lies before us as we are
writing. All the roll-calls are in the
journal. These denote that the Times
is entirely mistaken. An analysis of
the vote will show this.
To determine which is wrong, take
the vote for the resubmission bill
which is found on page 40 of the
house journal of March j, which is
as follows:
Brodie. Brotnov. Burdick. Connolly,
Crawford, Dibley, Elhard, Evans,
Flamer, Giedt, Hanawalt, HanHnson,
Hanson. Jensen, Jones of Barnes. Mar
tin Of Morton, Mathews, Mcdowell,
Mockler, Monek, Norm, Parkhill, Rohs
OF Morton. Simpson. Sinclair. Streeter,
Thoreson, Wake. Wedge.
The vote for the initiative and re-
ferendum bill is found at page 16 Of
the house journal of March 8, and is
as follows:
Anderson of Grand Forks, Blake,
Brodie, Brotnov, Buttz, Casey, Chap
man. Connolly, Cunningham, Dibley,
Elhard, Evans, Flamer. Garden, Giedt,
. Graham, Halaas, Hallick, Hannawalt,
Hankinson. Hanson, Jensen. johnson
of Pembina, johnson of Ward, Jones
of Barnes. Jones of Ransom, Law,
Martin of Morton, Martin of Billings,
Mathews. Miller, Mockler. Monek,
NORM. Parkhill, Plath, Putnam, Rohs
or Morton, Rose of Dickey, Schlenker.
Simpson. Steen, Stevens. Storey,
Streeter, Swendseid, Syvertson. Thor
eson, Treat, LELAND, Wake, Walker,
Wedge, Wexford, Mr.. Speaker.
a comparison of these votes Will
show that every name in the roll call