The log cabin Democrat., 1911-04-28
REPLIES 10 JUDGE PRINCE ARGUMENT FRANCIS BACON WRITES PIKE ROAD ADVOCATE HEADS 4 FEW DEUCES AND TRAYS"
 FROM HIS DECK.

Editor Log Cabin Democrat:
 We noticed in Wednesdays daily that the Judge attempted to reply to our article of Tuesday, but converted his argument into series of foolish retorts. The Judge admitted every thing but the mule story; and since he does not deny it we conclude that it is true, and we may also conclude that there is nothing really wrong with the proposed pike road bill, but simply by mistake the doctor set "Pap's" neck out of line and accord ingly he has been out of the line Of progress ever since. However, we do not desire to change the discussion of so serious a subject into a matter of senseless quips. The Judge did pay some slight attention to the bill itself ]; but in every respect he misropresent- ed it's provisions, whether malicious or ignorantly We do not know
 First, let us consider the general plan of the bill. The object, as clear ly stated in the bill, is to provide for improving the road from Little Rock to Fort Smith. In order to do this there must be organization, and for this the bill provides. In even the most democratic government in the world we must trust a few men with somewhat of extraordinary power. h the government of the state there must be a governor and legislators who for an appointed time hold the power of the people in their hands. In all cor porations there must be trusted repre- sentatives at the head of affairs. In all districts, ditch districts, levee dis tricts there must be treasurers and commissioners who hold powers and money in their trust. These things must be in order to secure efficiency. So in this proposed road district there must be an organization and officers to carry out it's powers.
 The wording of this bill is plain, careful avoiding all arrangements that might convey a concealed mean l ing It's whole construction is open and frank and it's provisions are clear ly and expressly stated. The bill has been published in this pape, and we ] do not hesitate to assert that there are not a dozen intelligent readers in the county, besides the Judge and Ledbet- ter, if they may be called intelligent readers, who can find anything sus- picious in it's character.
 Now, we will consider the Judge s interpretation. First, he says: "A few who want to get their noses in the pot have gotten up said pike bill and are trying to railroad it through so as to be commissioners The Judge has very little perception. He has overlooked the fact that the commis- sioners are expressly named in the bill; that they are Governor George w. Donaghey, w. A. Falconer and John NJ. Davis, men of high character and reputation, whose public careers have been highly honorable and whose lives are above reproach; and that none of these men have had any part whatever in framing the bill. He has overlooked that the position of com missioner is neither a desirable nor lucrative one for these gentlemen, who make many times more than the provided remuneration in their pres ent positions.
 Next, the Judge says that the com missioners are under no bond what. ever Of course they are not; neither are the directors of bank under bond. But the bill distinctly states that the treasurer shall be under bond. He is the one that holds the moneys, and this bond makes the or ganization absolutely safe at this point. Here the Judge has made a useless statement. Further he says that there will be more bonds issued than can be paid in 100 years. This is foolish and wholly unwarranted statement The bill distinctly pro vides in section 9, that no bond snail run for more than 30 years.
 The Judge next asks, What is to keep these commissioners from pock- eting at least one-haf of the bonds and then leave the said pike not half made?" We wonder if the Judge is