The Calumet news. [volume] (Calumet, Mich.) 1907-1938, 1914-08-08
Houghton. Mich. Aug. :. 1914.


Editor News;-I wish to reply to all
my critics. as far as time and space
will allow. and | also have some fur
! ther phases of the Sunday question TO
present, but as Mr.. Broome is one OF
the men To whom my article was ad-
| dressed, | feel that | should reply TO
him first and set him right ON one or
two points. / had hoped some OF my
| questions would be taken up i'm the
manner | requested. but | fail To see
where he has touched upon even one
point. Some of his insinuations are SO
unwarranted that they border on the
ridiculous To those who know my poll
| teal faith, and who have read my let
ters with any thought Even il my
sympathics were with the Reds" or
socialism of any sort (Which they GER
tainly are noO that would not make
any difference in this controversy. The
Reds" may or may not favor liberal
Sunday laws, but | know great many
good citizens who do. and | want -
have more Of the better class take an
interest in the question. That is one
reason | am writing these articles. in
order that they may not he mised into
believing II is only criminal class
who favor them.
one paragraph | will take up as rep
resentative of his reply to my article:
AN who want to he a law unto them |
selves, who have set forth such social |
istic arguments against the laws that
have been enacted by the representa-
tives of free people, prove that they |
are not patriots and are associated |
with the criminal class because all true |
patriots obey all the laws of any state
and are always thankful to any officials |
that call their attention To laws that |
have been ignorantly broken by them" |
In the first place | have never en-
couraged law-breakng, and in the ar
ticle he is Criticising, / plainly said: |
we believe i'm law and order, and |
wish 10 modify or have repealed the
unfair ones In an article printed i'm
another paper several days ago. said:
Il do not criticise the enforcement of
the laws, but | criticise those respon-
sible for the unjust ones, and my OBJ
ject is To call attention to them to the ]
end they may he modified or repealed
and that no more obnoxious ones he
slipped over under the guise of moral
ity."
Is ii fair to assume that such senti-
ment should drive man where they
serve each other on the bill of fare?"
And are all of those who have i'm the
past argued against unsatisfactory
laws, and I'm hundreds Of cases had
them repealed, are they all pals of
criminals and lacking in patriotism
And if we are free people" have we
not the right TO suggest changes with
out being branded undesirable citi-
Gems? In "A certain state among the
blue laws and Sunday laws (enacted
about the same time by the same kind
IF people, we find: mo food or lodg-
ng shall be afforded Quaker. Adam
tie or other Hereto" Again: mo
woman shall kiss her child on the Sab
bath. Also: suffer not a witch to
i've and the latter had the same
packing that the Sunday law has.
Were the men who repealed these laws
also Reds? one more explanation:
do not claim To be the leader of this
minority to which he refers, and | am
writing on my own hook" without
from anybody. have no
nuts to crack either. and to avoid fur
her explanations will quote from an
article printed several days ago: IL
nave never had. have not now and
lever expect to have any interest, di-
'ectly or indirectly, with any Sunday
money making schemes"
All ask is an intelligent discussion
II the question. and shall not take
my notice of the back handed compli-
nents ] receive, as my argument is not
Effected one particle whether / am a
scandal monger' or full of "conceit."-
Fair Play