Arizona republican., 1909-07-06
DID YOU OR DID YOU NOT?

Ways has the methods and manners of that fish which emits a dark col ored fluid when it is attacked, dyeing the surrounding waters, to enable it to escape. Wags yesterday exhausted two columns of space, which notwith some value considering the cost of white paper, with an illogical and almost incoherent reply to the charge that Wags' Principal Owner was guilty of an act of treachery to the Maricopa County Commercial club. But in it all there is not a word of express or constructive denial of the charge.
 No asseveration, however frequent, of the loyalty of wags and the Principal Owner to the club and to NIT. Jones can be a reply to that one alleged 'traitorous act. It has never been as-- serted that the Principal owner and Wags did not advocate the appoint ment of MT. Jones as a member of the Arizona railway commission. On the contrary, if is a part of the charge that the Principal owner did openly and most strenuously seek the ap- pointment of MT. Jones; that he ac- companied delegations to Governor Kibbey urging his nomination of MT. Jones, and that meanwhile Wags was clamoring vociferously for NIT. Jones appointment All this is admitted as of record. or, as we have said, it is one of the specifications of charge of villainy.
 It is also known that when MT. Jones was not appointed and when 1t became evident to Wags' Principal owner that he himself would not be appointed Ca thing long evident to everybody about the executive and legislative chambers), Wags even rose to mild criticism of the governor for aeglecting Mir Jones. That criticism has occurred from time to time until the present day.
 But the gist of the charge is this that after the governors definite re- ply to the delegation that MT. Jones was impossible, wags' Principal own CT. knowing that under the terms of the bill only one member could be appointed from this county, went back alone to the governor and congrat- ulated him on his firmness against the wish of the delegation. The Prin- cipal owner, it was stated, agreed Tn the privacy of the executive cham bers that the governor had done wisely in turning down MT. Jones.
 The foregoing paragraph includes substantially the whole charge printed by the Arizona Democrat more than a month ago. There was never simpler declaration of a villainous act. Can wild horses drag Ways before it to say yes or mo" to the question. 'Is that damning accusation of most damnable act true?'
 We think, however, that the matter has reached a stage in which 1t IS not essential whether Ways denies it or not. We believe that the silence of Wags, followed by Ways senseless squirming away from the main point has come to be regarded as an open confession of the truth of the charge. We have no doubt that a majority of the business men of this valley believed it was true at the outset and we believe now that nine out of every ten are convinced of the ab- solute truth of it.
 If this were a complicated affair; 1T innocence or guilt were difficult of establishment, Ways might offer that as an excuse for its neglect to at tempt the removal of the Odium which has been placed upon the shoulders of the Principal owner. But there are no complications. Within five min utes Ways can get a statement, we