The Twin Falls times. [volume] (Twin Falls, Idaho) 1905-1916, 1916-10-26
" Scratch Nihdrt" Repeats
!. II. U1dters in FOrcibLe
Reply to Fdris' Criticism
Representative Charges Nihar
With Improper Methods in Precious Work
for DiUiSion of County,

Returning to the charge, Hon Jas.
A. Waters in a reply to Hon. ]. w.
Faris, made public today, again ad-
vises all Republicans who are oppos-
ed to county division to scratch Nj
hart" Mr.. Waters denies that he
meant to intimate that Mr.. Faris in
any way acted in a dishonorable
manner and says that his conduct
in this respect was in striking con-
trast with that of Mr.. Nihart when
the latter was in the legislature. He
charges Mr.. Nihart with unfairness
and says that he secured the defeat
of the agricultural school bill by
dickering with the representative
and senators from North Idaho for
votes for county division. Lastly,
Mr.. Waters demands to know by
what right Mr.. Faris, a Democrat,
asks a Republican county central
committee to endorse Fred Nihart
The letter follows:
Hon. ]. w Faris,
Buhl, Idaho.
Dear Sir:
1 have no disposition to engage in
q newspaper controversy with any
one, and as neither you or l are can
didates for office, the voters of our
county are not particularly interest
ed in our legislative records of the
past. Pardon me, however, for the
personal reference to the extent of
saying that l had good and honest
motive for every legislative vote I
cast and am ready at the proper
time and place to defend my every
action. l feel, nevertheless, that
your open letter of recent date mer-
its a reply.
You seem to think that I made a
personal attack upon the integrity OF
your legislative record. That con-
clusion is unwarranted, and l think
that your over-sensitive nature has
caused you to read between the
lines and find charges that were
neither worded nor intended. No
Mr.. Faris, l cast no insinuatior
against your legislative effort fol
county division two years ago, mol
do l accuse you of double crossing
anyonr, for you had warned the
! voters before election day as to whal
would be your action. Your actor
in this respect but emphasizes il
contrast the action of Fred Nihar
when he was a member of the legis
lature four years ago. Then, he haC
$ been intrusted with the affairs o
the entire county, and sent to Bois'
as the result of a splendid vot'
from every community. But whel
E the session was drawing to a clos
Y he, without consulting his genera
l constituency and taking counse
a with f0W nnlifiQionC and In
owners in Bull, plunged headloni
f into the effort to divide the county
e He even in his zeal to obtain
d county seat for his home town Tin
S cidentially securing for himself ia
e political position) so far forgot hi
n obligation to those he was presume
d to represent as to fight and secur
the defeat of a bill that bore hi
name, and all because the passag
of that bill, which provided for tn
, location of an Agricultural schoo
= down here, might benefit those VIII
y opposed his division scheme. Nat
:. urally, the university interests c
. North Idaho opposed our demand
- for an agricultural school, and MI
Nihart, making common cause wit
the enemies of the county secure
y the university support ror his divis
ion bill. In fact, the senator frol
Latah county representing the un
versity interests was so mindful {
], his obligation to Mr.. Nihart for ds
h feating our agricultural school bill
RI or was so loyal to the conditions {
Is his bargain, that he introduced tn
'e Buhl County division bill in the ser
s ate. This is no reckless charge, bl
can be proven by C. e. Booth, th