The Idaho Republican. [volume] (Blackfoot, Idaho) 1904-1932, 1908-03-13

same principle into other matters Of
public interest instead Of trying to
publish a man into Office the first
week or two and then ridiculing
those who do not jump into line and
agree with you? Will you take time
to explain why you follow one prin-
ciple in the one case and the other
in the other? We nave no choice
whether you couch your language in
words relating to dogs with festered
sores, or whether you appeal to men
and women in language that will re-
fleet credit upon yourself and those
you address.
william e. Wheeler.
In The Register of March 9Th you
do not respond to the information we
gave the week before, showing some
Of your recent work and revealing
some of the incentives which prompt
ed you to use your editorial infiu-
ence as you did, but you copied a
weak attack of the Shelley Pioneer
whose position you did not under
stand, and whom we answered in The
Republican of the 9Th inst. The
same explanation is passed on to The
Register with our compliments, and
If you had the courtesy to let The
Pioneer rest on it's own oars until
there was time to answer 1t, you
would not be sharing their humilia-
ton now.
In another column under the head
ing "Trego's dirty politics" you state
that large part Of Trego's "Slush
Pot" (meaning The Republican, was
devoted to Jas. H. Brady and some
of the newspapers, and that we prom
Used more of it, which promises we
are making good
We have been criticised by no less
distinguished person than yourself
for not having more current political
news in The Republican, and for
never letting people know where we
stood, and in this matter you should
not be the first one to exclaim DIRTY
politics." when we enter upon an
impartial discussion of current politt-
cal matters. And until such time as
you eliminate the patent, or plate
matter and the patent medicine ad-
vertisements from The Register, it is
In poor taste for you to speak of The
Republican as "slush pot" to indi-
cate the presence of mud, muck
grease and slop, since not one line ot
the class of matter referred to above
is admitted into The Republican.
You speak of our having published
some of the court records in case OF
Mr.. Brady's company against whom
the jury had just found verdict, and
say that Judge Stevens is reported to
have had something to do with
the preparation of the article OF
at least read proof on it. He
neither prepared it nor read proof on
it nor knew what would be published
until it came to the public in the US
ual way. Neither did anyone else out
side of The Republican office. You
question why we published anything
about this case when we had not been
reporting the court news. We had
been reporting the court news, and
we still do, but will Editor Wheeler
explain why he published the court
news of that week, and omitted any
mention of that particular case? The
cases preceding it were reported
and those Immediately following 1t.
but any and all mention of the Brady
case was omitted. Having performed
that oversight it was only natural
for you to suppose that The Republic
can should resort to the opposite
course, and did not observe that we
reported on fourteen other cases in
the same issue of the paper.
viii you take the trouble to define
dirty politics" in your next edition
of The Register, and in doing so will
you have the manhood to face the
question squarely and not go of into
a string of abuse until you have fin-
ished that one point. Also will you
define the position you took in your
editorial of November 8, 1906, when
you roasted the Borah- Brady Good
ing combine for their trade made at
Pocatello on July 31,1906, which you
then designated as "the rottenest po-
litical deal ever perpetrated in Ida
ho?" VIII you reconcile your action
then with your action during the
campaign when you advocated theil
election, and reconcile it again with
your action of the past three weeks
advocating Mr. Bradys nomination
and election?
l.. Il. Dillingham;.
cat