The Montgomery tribune. (Montgomery City, Mo.) 1892-1910, 1908-10-02

tMNN W wv lNNEN LIVE. WIN NNNfNN. NH'N
ernor Stephens ana Governor porkrfl.
who were opposed tu home rule. tho Dram
ehop laws IN tie large oitlce wcr, not en-
forced. In taking HE position With
stephens ana buckCrv. is Nj. Covhcrd 60
be understood 49, coInWcnd'ur tnSif cd
mlnlstratiin If the police dap1rtmouta iu
our largo cities. and BE- o.. 80 bc under.
stood rs coudcnuiue Governor tclk be.
cause ho declared for home rulr' ! do rot
care what horn uf this dilemma MI Cow
herd tak,a. but let him answer those qucs.
lions. and answer tncm specifically! Docs
ne approve Of the conduct % the police
departments in Kansas city ana st Louis
while DocNCry and stephens wcrc govcr-
nor? Governor Folk claims that they were
both Inefficient aud corrupt WHAT docs
MIR. CoWhprd say upon this question: l
demand of Mi. Cowherd that he either re-
pudiate Dockery aud stephens, or rcpldi-
ate Folk. one thing Is certain IN refer
ence 10 this question " home RUE, anu
that is that the people Of the large cities
will not get it unless they clearly indicate
that They want il, And II they want II. |
have such confidence in their good citizen
ship and intelligence mat h'IicNe they
will use il to enforce the law, ana NOT
TO violate il But MIR. Cowhcrd VINO bo-
licvcs that we should forthwith give home
rule to- the Philippine Islands. win us
mixed population Of negroes. MalaNs ana
Cinnamon, with its combination OF iRnor,.
ancc, inc1paCitN and superstition, would
DENY il to the intelligent. law-ahldinE peo-
pie Of Kansas city, st. LOUIS ana ~.
Joseph. Iet13nS MT. INNhtlh tllllNN NItt
because he, as Mayor Of Kansas city; did
nothing TO enforce the drainNhop laws
providing for the closing of the, saloons
on Sunday, that other city ot1clais whom
the people might elect would Hollow ms
example
one thlng Is also certain. III r'lvIVl'St "
that even If the selection OF police, cleo
ton and excise officials is given to. me
state nroyidirr for the regulation of dram
shops will still remain the laws OF the
State until n majority OF INC people 5 rep
reseutatives want them changed. AT the
request Of Governor Folk, my once mas
enforced the laws regulating drafnsnops
In ST. Louis county ny the oIuVIlN
processes OF the courts ana u am tItSlr"
ed as Attorney General IN ~, LOUIS Iouh
ty. l can accomplish as Governor WIN an
honest Attorney General m me IdIEI
cities of the State, But why IS IL may !
again inquire, II the kepuolcah PLATFORM
Is in favor OF lawlessneSs ana the non
enforcement OF the laws 'eSuIftlhe uran-
shops, that all the laNleSS saloonkeepeIs
In the State are sdlportinE Mr. Cownero
and opposing me- There IS nothlng tha'
Mr.. Cowherd could say mat Woulu con-
vince those men that thHN are W3klus a
mistake in supporting MN ana mere Is
nothing that ] could say mat would win
for me their approval but ! want nei'her
their approNal nol tnelr votes LOT ! HaNe
no favors TO give TO those VINO Nlolate me
law, The s~aloonkeeper VINO oneNs lhe law
Is entitled 10 the law projections. anu an
absolutely square deal from the state. Al,
this he VIII nave rom me. But l mere anu
now declare unrelenting opposition TO tne
lawless saloonkeeper VINO seeks 10 nomi-
nate ana eject our puplc oIlCiaLS lot MS
own protection.
..x AGO, .ecoso ANN ne eou.
wv ~ ~
NJ co,hor5 bod sonetbtrg 20 say In
Oo" "' ~
his opening speech IN reference 10 my az
utude upon questions oil interest 10 tne
laboring classes; nave had no occasion
particularly to deal WIN questions anect.
ing the rights OF organized lapot except
as ] have had occasion TO decide cues
IONS ana 10 conuuct nusatIon III whicn
questions for the various state Depart
ments Affecting the interests OF the iaoor-
Ing classes. ! have e~ndeayored to render
decisions IN accordance WIN me law OF the
land, without rear or laVor 10 any class
IN the conduct OF ntlsatlon. nave en-
deaNored To sustain the laws that the peo-
pie have written upon the statute books,
And the fact that To-Day those VINO WorR
more than elght hours IN every twenty
four, IS due TO the provisions or the law
81 TINS STATE, the consututlonallty OF
which sustained IN the supreme Court
OF the united states. But M. CoWhero
makes the statement that | did not go on
re Committee on Resolutions OF the Re-
ubican National Convention, because J
DID not desire to be involved IN a contest
over the injunction plank winch was SUD
united 10 mat convention. rms state
nent is entirely lacking IN truth, ana as
sumo that MT CoWherd must nave beer
misiniormed OF ne would not nave made
IL nay name was never presented as a
m.mpei oil the on Resolutions
aithouSh IL was considered IN connection
WIN that position. But when 1 found tha'
MAJOR warner desired that honor, l with
drew IN ms favor IN Difference to his
broader experience and knowledge or
questions OF national politics. For tha'
ACT ! nave 10 apologies 10 oher TO any
pody, II was made public at the time
ana nave no hesitation IN saying now
lhat was IN iayor OF a more definite
declaration as TO the powers Of the courts
IN the granting o. lnJunctions than tha'
wnlSh IS contained IN the National Re
puoncdh platform. But there can be M
question out mat the declarations upor
unls SUBJECT IN the Republican Nationa
piatlorm mean far more 10 the laborine
glasses OF thls country than the declara'
ions upon the same subject in the plat.
statement of Mr.. Cowherd that / lodged
a vote upon this or any other question