The Grangeville globe. [volume] (Grangeville, Idaho) 1907-1922, 1912-10-10
Thursday. Oct. 10, 1912.
, THE AcTuArINc MOTIVE.

~AAO NAODO A0c PA<SSCu A4u JIlt AL
nanias club. This Is sad mistake
The Free Press editor placed himsel
there, and the Globe simply Gale,
attention to the fact in making pub
die correction of HE false statements
And 1t is a very noticeable fac
that the Free Press editor makes M
denial of the statements OF the Globe
that he laid down" on this commun
ity and his county in the county di
vision contest, and that he was call
cd down in very forcible language BY
leading members of his own party
for his conduct. VIII the Free Press
editor deny the charge? There are
two ways for him to refute the charg,
OF his having laid down" on his
home community. One by frankly
admitting that he was really In ia
vor Of county division along the pro
posed lines, and that his Conscience
would not admit of his opposing a
thing which he believed to be right.
The other Is by openly stating that
he Is opposed to county division, and
then publishing In connection there
with the able articles which he wrote
tn opposition to division. Certainly
he must have convictions one way or
the other. II he really does not
believe in the proposed division Of
the county, why was he so silent?
Can any one who Ia familiar with
the we'll established reputation OF the
Free Press man imagine the cause?
In regard to the claim made by the
White Bird Sun, and republished by
the Globe, that the election of e. L.
Parker as lieutenant governor, would
practically nullify. the effects OF the
successful anti-division campaign In
this county, for the reason that Mr..
Parker would thereby become presi-
dent Of the senate and would be IN q
position through the committee APP
pointments over which he would have
control and other influences of office,
to gain many more votes with which
to forward the county division propo-
ganda than Idaho countys represen-
tation would WELD, the Free Press
says: There Is absolutely nothing
to this political bugaboo built up by
the Salmon river paper. and nobody
knows It better than the Globe"
Will the Free Press editor please
state when he made this wonderful
discovery that there is absolutely
nothing to this claim, and that 1t is
simply political buncombe? Was II
before the primary election, during
which time he was plotting and plan
ming stealthily for the defeat of Par
ker for the nomination, and at the
same time wae keeping all utterances
out Of his paper for fear of financial
loss II the Cottonwood people got
wind of his actions? Or Is 1t since
the election, when he wants to try
and cover up his tracks by assuming
such a sudden and overweening inter
est in Mr.. Parker's candidacy and
becomes so fearful that the "westside'
citizens will not get justice, that he
Is now ready to denounce as false
through its paper (for the advance
ment of his present interests at Cot
tonwood) what he boldly asserted
was true on the streets of Grangeville
during the antldivision campaign
flor the advancement of his interests
at hcme) but which latter was never
intended to reach the ears of the peo-
pie which he is now trying to de-
ceive on the westside? Or will he
deny through his paper that he did
work for the defeat of e. L. Parker
Tin a gentle way so as not to disturb
or excite Parker's friends) during the
primary?
The Globe would like to have the
Free Press editor get on one side
or the other of this proposition and
stay there long enough for both the
Grangeyille and Cottonwood people to
find him. This "peekaboo" game
which he has been indulging in, in
which he has played off one side
against the other for his own finan-
cial ends, should be drawn to a
close. To draw the issue so there
win be no mistake about it. the ed
itor of the Globe will make the state
ment that the editor of the Free
Press did work against e. l.. Par
ker's candidacy in the primary on
the grounds that his nomination
would be detrimental to the interests
If Idaho county. Now this is either
true or It Is not. VIII the Free
Press editor dare say which it is?
II the editor of the Free Press did
work against e. L. Parker on the
that his NOMINATION would