The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1914-10-22
AN SUFFRAGISTS
 PRESENT CHARGES
Say That Opponents Are Cir cuIating Personal Attacks
 Against Them.

y
 cuIating Personal Attacks
 Against Theil.
 fF'rom the National Suffrage
 Press Bureau.)
 Assa "a. result of the hot fight now in progress in the westrn states between the suffragists- and anti-suffrag1sts, A1ra. O. D. Oltphant of Trenton. New Jersey, now on the stump in Montana, has brought suit for $5o.O00 against 8 Montana newspaper. alleging that she has been 1ibe1ed by the publication or Q suffragist poem which accuses her of being al esstraitor to all the race holds just and good, an ally of the white slave trade, a supporter of the whisky tntersts,5 a. partner of procTrerS, and 3 sympafhizer with brothel keepars.
 According to the announce1nnt given put here this afternoon by Mrs. Arth 1r M. Dodge, president of the National frage the offensive poem was pub lished October F and dedicated to Mrs Dliphant-
 According to the -sunragists. this attack on Mrs Oliphant was the straw that broke the camei's back. Mrs. Dodge sets forth in her state nlerit that neither she nor her organi- sEaI1Onz can d1lOTo IO I04A4etlA1 longer under the abuse and in face or such unspeaka.bIe means are are employed by their opponents
 Mrs. Oliphant's $56.Ooo suit is in charge of Attorneys Hall and " hit lock Of R6issoula and E. B. Howell or Butte Montana Mrs. Oliphant. who has been an actice anti-suffrage work er ana campaigner for the past three years, is now general secretary Of the New Jersey state association. She spoke in Bridgeport last spring. She has been speaking against suffrage in North Dakota and Montana for the past month, and she has been follow ing with her speeches the route taken bv Dr. Anna Howard Shaw, president <,f the National American Woman Sa1f- frage association.
 Tn her statement regarding the dras- tic action taken by Mrs Oliphant to silence the l1715ustif1a.ble attacks of the euffragdste. Mrs. Dodge says:
 ssFor many years we have eTiefured attacks from the suffragists, eaenef stating or suggesting that we are saf- s5liated or cooperating with the liquor interests and the vice interests. Suf- fraeists have stated publicly that fl, ese acc11sations must have been true or we would have instituted lawsuits. Our whole policy is against the pub 1icitv resulHine from such an action
  atacks. knowing that the general pub lie did not believe them to be true. ,f5,sra comes time when patience ceasas to be a. virtue.
 ssThe attack on Mrs. Olfphant is criminal and she has instituted a law suit for S50000 The state of mind Erhiob. ind1Bced the author to write sinuatipns of prominent suffraglsts and they are really. to blame for 1t all though they may deprecate the ex- treme form which is the result of their attacks.
 Since the tame that organized op- position to woman suffrage first began fo work, in the California campaign, vicious az1tacIzs have been made. It ys as then stated that $250. 900 was be- ing used by the liqq1or Interests in California. to defeat suRrage in that estafe The president of the California Iiquor association denied that any money was being spent by his organi- zafion, ;vvhLch was divided on the sup feet of equal suffrage. In the Ohio rampadgn 1t was stated that the same sum was being used, recent speakers Stating 1t as $So0.O0o. This was also denied by the so-called interests. During the campaign in Michigan, the attacks were particularly frequent.
 Tn the hearing. before the suffrage ! 5s1s pr Anna Shaw said, We do not 6ear that little band Of professional a.n4dyornen going around the country adyocaffux home, heaven and mother. We are not at all disturbed by them The only purpose they serve is, that 1bv holding out their alzirts they act as a screen for rhe hquor traffic, the gamblers, the victims and those in fereEted in dance halls and places where young girls are ruined These people have a good screen behind which they can hide and carry on their antagondszn and their opposition to f,rur 1novenut This sentiment has been repeated constantly by suffrage speakers and in official publications Personal attacks on our speakers have been frequent. One of them has been repeatedly accused of receiving "a check from the liquor interests in California, several suffrage speakers stating they have seen the check AS fhere Was no such cheek, they have been silent in regard to proofs when challenged to produce evidence. This speaker has been a special object of attack apparently because the sunra- sists are afraid of her It was stat ed in a typewriter paper circulated in Ohio that she was the daughter of a brot41el keeper in San Francisco, in spite of the fact that she came from another state.
 ..In the present. campaign in North Dakota ana Nevada, Dr. Anna Shaw stated from the platform, Mrs o. D. OIiphant will be here in a few days dressed in her fluffy white dress and white coat, to tell women to stay in the home. She comes from the big gest corporation state and her family is connected with corporations-' This latter statement was absolutely 1n- true as was her statement that Mrs OdIphant had two children whom she had left in boarding school so thai she night speak for anti-suffrage Mrs Oliphant has no children.
 Dr. Shaw also said, All anti-suffra- gists are not in the vice combines but all vice combines are anti-sufragists- Speaking of the Michigan campaign she said, We sufragists had to pay -.