The Irish standard. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn. ;) 1886-1920, 1914-12-26
K. Of c. VS.. Criminal Libel.
(Continued frsm Page ~

CONTINUED frem Page ~
secret work of the knights of Column
bus, and we desire to obtain an anthem
tic copy of said ritual and secret work
for use in the trial of our clients, since
the prosecution alleges that there is
no oath taken by candidates for any of
the K. G. degrees. Can you supply us
with what we desire and need?
Our clients have no knowledge of
the authenticity of the K. c. oath, hav-
ing received them in the first instance
from your company, and they naturally
rely upon you to aid them in their
present difficulty. .
An early reply will be greatly appre-
ciated.
Yours very truly,
LEROY N. KING.
The answer of 1.-THE Menace" was
as follows:
Aurora, Mo-, March 5, 1918.
Mr.. Leroy N. King,
Philadelphia, Pa.
Dear Sir:
Replying to your letter of February
9th, we wish to state that we are not
in possession of the ritual and secret
work of the knights of Columbus, but
we believe we are in fair way to get
it, and the statement in a recent is
sue of The Menace, which led you to
believe that we had it in our posses
sion, while somewhat of bluff on
our part, was based on the fact that
we know that it can be had. You will
note that we printed in our No. 80 the
ritual and secret work of the Hiberni-
ans, and we are positive that it is au-
thentic. The alleged oath which your
clients in Philadelphia were arrested
for distributing, was circulated in
practically every state during the late
campaign, and the demand upon us
for this document was something
great, and we had received copies of
them from so many sources we simply
printed and handled them as we would
any other job of printing, to supply the
demand, and while we have no apol-
ogies to make for do doing, we do not
have any evidence that the oath is the
one which is taken by members of the
knights of Columbus.
We feel sure that it would be folly
for you to undertake to base your de-
Tense on the authenticity of this docu-
ment.
We note that some of the officials
are claiming that it is not an oath
bound order, which, of course, is sub
terfuge and untrue. You can depend
on them resorting to any method
which they can contrive to bluff away
their critics, and if they are so bent on
indicating themselves, why not ask
that they present in court the obliga-
tions which they do take. This would
be the quickest way to clear the mat
ter up in the minds of the people.
We are filing your letter and will
be on the lookout for anything which
we think will aid in the defense of
these men.
Trusting that this will be satisfac-
tory, we beg to remain,
Yours sincerely,
THE MENACE PUBLISHING CO.,
Aurora, Mo.
NIB SIR
A Precious Exhibit.
The letter from 1.-The Menace" to
Leroy N. King, ESQ.,, of counsel for
the defense, is precious document.
Properly utilized, it should sound the
deatl-knell of the malodorous Aurora
sheet and the whole brood of lesser
journalistic reptiles that have been
Matched in it's wake. 1t will be noted
that there is no individual signature
to the communication, and this is
characteristic. However, the initials
M. B., typewriter at the side, prob.
ably stand for Marvin Brown, associate
editor.
Be that as it may, The Menace Pub
fishing Company, in a letter which it
was never dreamed would see the
light, confesses having been the chief
source Of supply of an atrocious SLAM
der which was circulated in prac-
tically every State during the late
campaign" I'VE simply printed and
handled them as we would any other
job of printing" say the Aurora con.
spirators, to which they brazenly add:
I'VE have no apologies to make for so
doing" No apologies even to their
poor dupes, hailed before the bar of
justice, to whom, on the morrow of
their arrest, they gave loud assurance
of full protection, only to callously
desert them in their hour of supreme
need. Surely in the plight of these
men Is a lesson which may we'll be
pondered by the thousands of deluded
tools of Menace" malignity and
greed.
And what say the Philadelphia min.
listers who, misled by the Rev. DR..
Barnett, rallied to the defense of a
free press" as exemplified in the de.
testable Aurora publication? Have
they no rebuke for its violation of the
commandment, Thou shalt not hear