The Ocala evening star. [volume] (Ocala, Fla.) 1895-1943, 1911-10-04

ed IN the campaign that advocate
temperance. charitable or what not.
that our good women of Marion county |
want or need for the protection Of their /
homes or for the uplifting OF society.
I still believe in the justice OF separa- |
ton of the white school fund from the /
negro school fund and whilst at ITALIA !
hassee I had five among the best law
yers in the state to look into the mat
ter. All of these lawyers agreed with
me as TO the justice Of such a law and
/ hope to see such law enacted some
day. During the campaign I advocated
the disfranehisement of all illiterate
and drunken negroes. whose votes
have been the means Of bringing re-
proach upon our county and state. |
introduced and had passed through the
senate a bill to disfranchise this class
of negroes. The bill was a consti-
tutiona1 one. embodying the grand
father clause that is in operation in
most of the Southern states. This bill
went to the lower house. but il Mr..
Bullock ever raised his voice in its be-
half I never heard of it.
Now in regard to the Lake George
preserve matter. In talking to Mr. R.
l. Martin some months ago in regard
to doing some surveying for me. he
said he had done some work for this
Lake George company and remarked
during the conversation that he
thought these people were paying too
much license for hunting as they had
to pay in both Marion and Lake. their
lands being in both of these counties.
Mr.. Martin never intimated to me that
he Loo 81 inn in
the interest of these people So the
matter was never thought OF in that
connection by me. Mr.. Bullock says
that he promised Mr.. Martin to frame
| a law exempting these people from
paying a license in Marion county and
did it, This is just what / stated
Mr.. Bullock did and it is part of sec
| ton six of the new game law, that.
Mr.. Bullock has refused to acknowl-
edge heretofore / never heard of
| Lake county passing special bill for
| the relief Of these people
Mr.. Bullock particularly objects to
my having called these people his
clients. Mr.. Webster says a client Is
zone under the protection of another.
Did not Mr.. Bullock take these peo-5
pie under his protection according to
his own public Acknowledgement?
! Whether he did this directly or thru
| Mr.. Martin it matters not. Further
more Mr.. Bullock stated to Col Rog-
ers and myself when discussing this
! bill in Tallahassee that he was in di-
lrect communication by letter with
these people through their manager
or head of company, Mr.. Seborn. It
matters not whether he had ever seen
them or their lands. he was in direct
i y;f1 (rN II fhnv,
said) and was so interested in their
| welfare that he refused to support the
bill unless it exempted these people
paying a license in Marion county.
Were not the people under his pro-
lection? Were not these people his
clients, when he had promised Mr..
Martin as he publicly admits to frame
a special law in their behalf, exempt
ing them from a license tax? This he
emphatically says he did. I have
proved that Mr.. Bullock was repre-
senting these people, that they were
under his protection and that he was
looking after their interest, hence they
were his clients. But it was not nec-
essary for me to prove this as he
stands seIf-accused and the fa1sehood
is thrown back into his own teeth.
fully explained in my first article
to Mr.. Bullock and the public why Col
Rogers and I accepted Mr.. Bullock's
amendments. This article throws fur
Ither light on their compromise bill.
The compliment paid Mr.. Bullock b,
1.-the public in sending him to the leg
| islature was due to a great extent K
two facts. namely: his family standing
and his supposed reformation.
Has he been true to his friends?
Has he been true to his county AM
Estate?
Has he been true to the honoret
name he bearsg I have never writer
: an article for publication concernin,
the new game law, to Mr.. Bullock, un
less previously assailed. and this will
be my last article to Mr.. Bullock un
less 1 am again assailed.
Respectfully, E. L. Carney.
: