Arizona republican., 1920-08-25
Where the People
 May Have a Hearing
Review Of MT. RaIsy's Letter


 To The Editor,
 Arizona Republican,
 Phoenix, Ariz.
 Dear Mir. Editor:
 Perusing, as is my custom, the edi- torial page of The Republican at the breakfast table this morning, and find ing there a communication from MT. E. D. Raley concerning the "encyclicaI letter. about which you had made few remarks on the day before. feel. as Mir. Raley felt the force of an inner urge to come back at him. If in this letter I speak directly to Mr. Raley, as he spoke to you, it will prevent any misunderstanding, and so. with this preface, I will make a short examina- ton of his article.
 Mir Raley begins by trying to soften the impending blow by compliment, but one, unfortunately, which is pal pably invidious. He says that "all of your editorials are reaG by me every day in the year" wherefore, mo one could pay you a higher compliment. With all respect to the reverend gen. tlernan, the modesty that should be in- herent in minister Of the gospel was forgotten in this statement. Surely 1t might have been a higher compliment" if he had told you that someone. recog- nized as being an authority because of his taste, mental acumen or sound
 
 his high standing in the community. reads and admires your editorials. l may compliment you personally be- cause of your editorials, but it would be hard for my worn typewriter to print an assertion that such a compli- ment could not be bettered.
 One of the lesser gateways to Hea- van, we have been told, is courtesy. The reverend gentleman forgot this for a moment when he wrote his next para graph, for he comes out with definite statement that you have said some thing that is untrue. Surely he could have softened this. He acknowledges in another part of his letter that edi- tors and ministers may be mistaken. Why could he not have given you the benefit of this belief? But if, as he says there was no suggestion that any one should vote for the marked names on the list why were they marked? MT. Raley knows that it ms not always necessary to hit one on the head to inculcate an idea. Something was to be attained by the list, a preference was to be shown or why was the list pre- pared? To afford an hours amusement to those who made it? But this is unworthy of preachers. To afford an opportunity to hide their charity under the appearance of paying a printers bill? But this is unreasonable and foolish Let us. then, Mir Raley, simply say that Lne 6QlIOT was not as mistaken as you have hinted
 At this point MT. Raley, consciously or unconsciously, twists a statement of the editorial out of all semblance to it's real self, and then proceeds right valiantly to belabor it. We quote: Second you say that church people have no right to suggest to their friends which candidates are most acceptable" The editor never said this. He said, (we quote from the editorial in ques- tion) conceding for a moment the preposterous proposition that ANY PREACHER OR GROUP OF PREACH FRS has right to prepare guide for voters Surely Mir. RaIey will concede, even in the fiery enthusiasm of his zeal that there is a vast differ ence between what the editor said and what Mir. Raley asserts he said. In fact, 1t appears that Mir. Raley made a mistake"
 Taking. then, the editors statement. as being the true one, let us examine Mir Raley's remarks in this paragraph. He says that from the time of Soc rates somebody has been telling the good people how to vote. If this is fact then we must believe that the good people,, since the time of Soc rates have been as deficient in men, tality as they have been ignorant of the principle of the vote. This prin- ciple, as Mir. Raley will concede, is that the individual may have the oppor- tunity to express his own idea of given proposal. If they follow, the sug- gestions of another. they are giving support to another's thought, and. as far as the principle of their votes is concerned, they have failed in their