Webster City freeman. [volume] (Webster City, Hamilton County, Iowa) 1884-1946, 1914-12-29

for a five mile limit law, not per-
hitting saloons within five miles OF
any college and he voted for bill
requiring saloons to close at eight
O'Clock. Yet in the face of this rec
ord the anti-saloon league says Mr..
Chase is with the liquor people and
the liquor people are with him.
Bro. Kamphoefner Speaks in Riddles
(From Thursdays Daily.)
Editor Freeman-Tribune: Do you
like riddles? Here's a new one.
What is the difference between the
Freeman-Tribune and the Anti-Sa-
loon League? Give it up? Why, the
answer is easy. The Anti-Saloon
League has been known to acknowl-
edge that it has made a blunder.
have read carefully your rejoin-
der in last nights issue, and l must
commend it for one thing. AS an
exhibition of graceful side-stepping
it is hummer" You say 1.-The
Freeman Tribune must be very
Dense" Oh no, you are not dense
at all; you are really very cute. You
know that l have never questioned
your statement that the League
made mistake, and yet you fiddle
on that same string through anoth-
err column and a half last night. If
that is all you have to contribute to
the discussion, we might as we'll
stop, for that is ancient history, and
is so dry that it rattles.
The point at issue is this: Did or
did not the Freeman-Tribune blund-
err in attacking the methods of the
League and seeking to discredit the
organization in the eyes of the COM
munity? The Freeman-Tl ibune can
not deny that, under the Leagues
present methods, any candidate for
office can get his proper rating
(either "wet" or "dry') IL he so
desires. If the candidate does not
choose to cooperate with the
League to set himself in the right
light before the people, is it just to
hold the Leagues methods up to rid
icule? Would it not be more in har-
mony with the facts to say that the
candidate had been unjust to him.
self?
The Freeman-Tribune has a Won
derfully fertile imagination in dis"
covering a "veiled threat" in the en-
quiries sent out by the League. You
make the charge that "the League
arbitrarily brands the candidate
wet" if he fails to answer" their
questions. I wonder that you should
feel yourself qualified to critic the
League at all, with such woeful ig-
norance of it's methods. You have
been fighting a straw man,-one OF
your own making,-all the while.
haven't you? For the charge you
make is not true. In the pamphlet
sent out before the primaries last
June many candidates were marked
thus 81, and an explanatory note
at the beginning stated very plain
ly that this meant, non-committal.
Some who had written that they
were in favor of advanced temper
. ance legislation, but did agree with
the League in all the measures it
! was advocating, were marked "F,"
, which the explanations stated
meant, fair. So you see there is moth
ing in the methods of the League
, that would put a man in false po-
sition before the people, if he cares
to be put in the right position.
You speak of "shyster lawyers"
as sometimes working graft out Of
the prosecution of liquor cases.
There is nothing new about that;
everybody knows it. But what has
that to do with the matter? Have
not "shyster lawyers" worked the
game with nearly every law on the
statute books? But that is no plea
for emasculating the law.
It seems that the charge of "char-
acteristic perverseness" which you
first brought against Senator Chase,
and now seek to lay at my door,
must rest with the FreemanTrib-
une. It seems mighty hard for you
to acknowledge that you have blum
dered. But a really magnanimous
soul ought to be glad to acknowl-
edge a mistake, when it is pointed
out to him. So come across, Mr.. Ed
itor: it will do you good. You will
feel better when you get it out Of
your system. Respectfully,
C. H. Kamphoefner.
w. IL. D.,..J C%ro;o,l%