Ellsworth American. [volume] (Ellsworth, Me.) 1855-current, 1908-03-18
In Defence of William T. Haines
Reprinted, by request, from the Portland
Express of March 9.

Reprinted, by request, from the Portland
Express of March g.
To TIE Editor of the Express:
notice an editorial in your paper Of
March 3 under the heading of Republican
8 iccess" and reprinted with favor in the
L ,wiston Journal on March 4, principally
directed to the candidacy of Hon. W. T.
Haines, of Waterville. In this you seem to
question Mr.. Haines' being republican,
| and talk about his working for democratic
success and as "Arguing With Pennell and
Other Democrats" and you say that .''he
/ (Mr. Haines) asked the legislature Of
Maine by two-third's vote to condemn
| the prohibitory law and recommend to the
people that it be abrogated and annulled."
| You also say: ''Four years ago he was
outspoken against the saloon, and daily
now he is telling the people he believes in
| the prohibitory law"
As a republican and prohibitionist and
nti-resubmissionist who has lived in
Waterville with Mr.. Haines since 1880, and
been associated with him during all these
years in business and politics and, know
ing well his acts and deeds all this
time, want to deny some of these allega-
tons. I want to put you right, and the
public through you, for Mr.. Haines is en-
titled, whether we agree with him upon
the question of resubmission or not, to
the benefit of the truth. He should not
| be misrepresented.
We were present at the hearing before
the committee on temperance at which
you say ''he asked the legislature of
Maine by two-thirds vote to condemn
the prohibitory law and recommend to
the people that il be abrogated and an
nulled'', and we say to you and TO the
public through your columns that Mr..
Haines said nothing of the kind, nothing
from which any such differences can be
fairly drawn. His whole argument was
based upon the theory that resubmission
would result in the reaffirmation of the
principles of prohibition in this State, and
also in defense of these principles and not
in opposition to them.
| We enclose copy of what he said before
! the committee, which he read at that time,
| and has since had printed and widely cir
culated that people may read for them
selves what he did say. Also, IN connection
Herewith, a copy of his previous interview
of Jan. II, and we ask you to read both
and then tell the public why you made
| such statement as the above about Mr.
Haines. In all the long years ! have
known him, never heard him say word
IN favor of the licensed saloon, but always
opposed thereto and in favor of prohi-
bition and we noticed that the Lewiston
Journal on Jan. IS last, referring to Mr.
Haines' interview of the previous day,
editorially remarked: "Mr. Haines is
sound on the question of resubmission,' -
and may ask through your columns why
such change in their attitude in regard
/ to his views on this su biect in the last few
m onths
| Personally, do not favor resubmission
| in any form, but it is fair and just to any
republ candidate for governor that
their should be no misrepresentation of
their statements and the reasons for their
positions, and especially by republican
| newspaper.
Iwant to add that Mr.. Pennell, before
the committee on temperance of the last
legislature, following Mr.. Haines' address
made the severest criticisms of it of any
man who spoke at that bearing, and il
they have ever been in agreement upon
any phase of the liquor question, have
nev-r known it.
Mr.. Pennen argued for license and the
licensed saloon before that committee.
Mr.. Haines argued for resubmission to
satisfy the demands of the people for the
right to vote on that question, urging that
the prohibitory law was sure to be re-
affirmed by that vote, thus aiding and
Strengthening it. No two arguments
could be more opposed to each other than
was Mr.. Pennell's and Mr.. Haines'.
While we may disagree with Mr.. Haines
on the ACCESSIBILITY of resubmission for
any reason, no one who knows him can
doubt his loyalty to the republican party.
wish this statement to be published in
the same paper that your editorial was
published that it may be read by the same
people in justice and fairness to Mr..
Haines and to the people who are inter
ested to know about him and his position
on this important question.
Very truly yours.