White Pine news. [volume] (East Ely, Nev.) 1920-1923, 1921-02-13
EDITOR LEONARD 'VYkSs@as'
TO MAYOR W|TCHfR'sARC0MENT

Ely Record has assumed proportions
requiring space which would pro-
hibit publication of such articles
weekly in local newspaper, because
sIch attempt would result in crowd
ing from the columns of the News
much other matter of local interest
The editor of the News has no per-
sonal interest In the controversy. but
in the interest of fairness desires at
all times to publish both sides OF
question. The arguments on both
sides seem TO now have been tho
roughly covered and the answer
made by Editor Leonard of the Rec
ord to the statements made by the
mayor in the last issue OF the News
F, is given as follows:
From the Ely Record. February If.
| The lengthy TRADE of personal abuse
of the editor of the Record which appeared
| in the White Pine News on Sunday last.
| signed by Mayor Witcher was simply a
smoke screen to camoufiage the real issue
| between the community of Ely and the
city administration. The mayors idea
| seems to be to make il personal affair
with the editor of the Record and thereby
eliminate the real points in the contro-
sersy. SO far the Record has confined it's
| discussion strictly to the city.s affairs.
but as the mayor has seen fit to go into
personalities the Record is compelled to
answer them. The following statements
are from the mayors article:
First have Mr. Tamblyn and Mr.
| Eddy's word for il that the editor of
the Record was present at a council
| meeting and virtually argued for re-
duction of taxes
Since the above appeared in print the
editor of the Record called upon Mr. Tam
| blyn and Mr.. Eddy in regard to the mat
| ter. Mr.. Tamblyn states that he never
told the mayor that the editor of the
Record virtually argued for a reduction
OF taxes Mr.. Eddy claims that this al
legged talk was made at the big meeting of
citizens at the city hall in July, when the
citizens met to protest against the paying
of $500 to the mayor for his junketing
trip east to investigate the condition of
| the bond market. Mr.. Eddy would not
state positively that the editor made n
talk at all, but claimed that inasmuch as
everybody present talked. the editor
| must have made talk As matter of
fact Ar. Mayor. there were forty or fifty
prominent citizens present. and not one
OF the speakers asked for or made any
reference to reduction OF taxes. They
were not there for that purpose Our
recollection of the affair is that We were
very busy taking notes. and the Record
of that week showed fve-eolumn report
of the meeting. in which your adminstra-
4 . tfr,.
you would like to report of that
meeting. Mr.. Mayor. we win reproduce 1t
In the Record for your especial benefit
During the present week c. A Walker.
John Weber Rev. James mclaughlin. f.
NJ Clark. Robert Baird George Doyle.
Ed Millard. Royal Matthias. A J. Proc
tor and H. W. Edwards. all of whom
were present at the meeting. have
stated to the editor that he did not "vir-
tually," or in any other manner make
an argument for a reduction of taxes
Now. Mr.. Mayor. who told the truth?
We are willing to leave the verdict to
| the people
The Record deliberately falsifies
when il says the city for years past
has refused TO make public state
ment as to its financial affairs Such
with the city records every month
during my administration, and the
Record editor knows this The Record
again falshes when II says that Mr..
Leonard has been present at many
council meetings and has always pub
lished all information obtainable The
records are public He has often
heard them read and he could have
had them for the asking
Clearly another sidestep, Mr. Mayor.
II is not a question of the record being
filed away in the city's safe. What the
people have wanted and what the Record
asked for at different times was pub
lished statement of the city's financial
affairs. and that they did not get until
very recently, and then only in part.
Upon inquiry OF Mr.. Eddy and MIR.
Tamblyn | find that the Record did
not publish the audit made by Mr..
Armand covering a period of three
years for the reason that Mr. Leonard
asked 10 cents a line to do Ii was
therefore decided TO publish and pay
for only a synopsis OF the report, but
Mr.. Tamblyn left the complete audit
with MIR. Leonard with statement
that he might publish such parts of IL
In addition as he saw ft
This then. is a candid admission of
what the Record claimed. although the
minutes OF the meeting when the audit
was ordered and also when the audit was
accepted by the city will show that the
audit was ordered printed in full At
least that is our recollection. The Record
does not hesitate to say that there is not
a single newspaper in the state that prints
legal notices for the county or city free
OF charge. and the rate OF 10 cents line
is only half the legal rate allowed by law
for such work. And in this connection
we ask the mayor II when he was in the
banking business It was his custom to
loan the city money without charging in
terest for IL? How is an editor going to
pay n city tax rate Of $i.75 and not charge
for publishing legal notices?
The Record sidesteps my question
as to whether he will publish our en-