The Liberal democrat. [volume] (Liberal, Kan.) 1911-1924, 1918-09-19

is question of Hollands word
against Oldham's word, and we, for
one are willing to take Hollands, as
against that of old disloyal Oldham,
even If our county attorney sees fit to
reverse the order.
The matter in small type at the
bottom of the News's article we are
inclined to attribute to Mr.. Light,
and several very broad statements
are made therein. He says the trip
to the Holland place was not made
for the purpose of investigating Old
ham, but on another matter, leading
the reader to believe that he consid-
cred it unimportant to investigate a
charge of that nature, and merely
dropped in there incidentally and
questioned Oldham in regard to the
matter. Upon the statement of Old
ham that he did not know he did not
have to pay for the stamps right
away, and that he would take some
Of them, Mr.. Light deemed him per-
fectly loyal, and his explanations be-
ing so sufficient, let him go his way
to kill a man who turned him in as
disloyal if he chose.
From the article it can be seen
plainly that Mr.. Light gives little
credence to the sworn statements of
the hands on the Holland ranch, but
that he thinks more of the word of
Oldham than all the other testimony
together. Perhaps he has reason,
and perhaps there are several. We
have heard it limited that there were.
1t seems that Mr.. Light has very
suddenly sensed his "duty" as an Of
ficer, but we happen to be aware of
case wherein his sense of duty was
not so keen. We had no intention of
making it public, as we knew it would
be considered as politics." regard
less of the fact that the Democrat
stands for law and order However,
since we have been accused of this
crime, and to show how easily he
could have discredited Oldham's
statements had he desired so to do,
and still not stretched his conscience,
we shall relate the story, and it is a
comforting fact that we had with us
all the time a witness by whom we
can prove the truth of every word in
the statement.
On Saturday evening before the
primary the editor of this paper was
walking on Kansas avenue, when we
were stopped by farmer living near
Liberal, who told us that intoxicat-
ing liquor was being sold at bust
ness place in Liberal. He made the
statement that he knew it was intox-
icating because he had drank it and
nothing else, and that he was under
its effects. He further stated that he
would swear to these facts and would
get some of the stuff for evidence.
Without questioning him as to the
nature of the drink or where it was
being sold, we started out to find Mr..
Light. He was soon located, and the
facts placed before him. He hesi-
tated about acting, as he said he was
"afraid it was some sort of political
scheme" but we insisted that he
make an investigation. Together with
the writer, the informant and anoth-
er man, Mr.. Light went into GER
tain business place and taking the
statement of the informant that he
was under the influence of intoxi-
eating liquor; that he had drank
nothing but what was being sold as
cider, started to write out search
and seizure warrant. While he was
thus engaged, the informant and the
writer visited the place, bought two
glasses Of the stuff and brought it to
Mr.. Light, who smelled it and made
the statement that he would hate to
drink it and take the chance of its
not intoxicating him. The warrant
was then given to DR.. W. o. Nelson,
deputy sheriff, who went and got the
stuff. Mr.. Light had test made and
we heard no more of the case. A few
days later we visited his Office, and
he told us that altho it was found the
stuff contained alcohol, it was impos-
sible to tell how much, and that since
he believed it impossible to convict
with the evidence he had he thought
best to drop the case.
Wasn't he just "keen" to do his
duty?
And yet, this is the kind of a
county attorney who is so arduous in
his duty when charge is preferred
against decent citizen by man
proven disloyal.
The statement is made in the ar
ticle that Oldham was old and feeble,
yet he was doing mans work on the
farm, and, according to Hollands
own statement, was good hand.
Surely a man who can do that is not
particularly feeble, but Mr.. Light or
whoever wrote it, wanted to give Hol-
land the worst Of it and succeeded
admirably.
The statement that had Light laid
down and not prosecuted Holland we
would have lambasted him for doing
it is nothing more or less than a
plain, old-fashioned unvarnished lie.
Since the publication Of the two ar
ticles' this case has been pretty well
threshed over and we have found
that a majority Of the people we
have talked to are Of the opinion that
Mr.. Holland should receive the sup
port of the people in this matter, as
he has at all times shown his willing
ness to get back of every patriotic
movement, while Oldham, is just the
opposite, and since he must face trial
no one doubts but that the outcome
will be perfectly satisfactory to him.