The Nevada County picayune., 1922-02-23
THE I1SE-A SECOND
 REPLY TO JOHN TiYEEZER''
By Rev. J. A. Sage

By RpF. J. A SdSe
 | am due the editor and readers of the Picayune an apology which Is here by sincerely offered Two weeks ago | used almost one entire page of the paper in replying to an effusion from the pen of John Tweczer," which was by no means worthy of snch serious consideration and lab0red effort on my part l am quite convinced that the aforesaid John was really sur priscd to find that anyone would take him so seriously The same is true of his rejoinder to my paper which ap- peared in the last issue of the llcay- une. l promise in advance that this reply to the above mentioned fejoinder shall be brief. l also express here the hope that this paper may close the dis cussion so far as l am concerned.
 For after all, what is the use of con tinung to argue with man who bllnd- ly shuts his eyes to established and proven facts and will not he convinced even by logic of experience. In his last paper he tells us that there is no use to argue With a woman or preacher Of one thing he may be well asSured-the women and the preachers will not be convinced by the sort of argument and the poorly camoufiaged appeals to ignorance and prejudice by which he has sought to win the support of the farmers to the lost cause of old John Barleyeorn. Further. I take oc casion to remark in passing that he k mot likely to have any better success with the farmers than he is having with the preachers and the women,
 It is told of the late Henry W. Grady that on one occasion he was talking with a company of friends con corning a certain matter when one of his friends interrupted him and said. Grady. hold on q moment; I will give you some facts" Grady, with twinkle in his eye said, No. no, please don't; facts hamper me" But facts do moi in any wise hamper John TweeZer. He lightly brushes them aside with T wave of his hand. or q stroke of his facile pen and naiyelY proceeds to an- nounce his own opinions and conclnS ions in utter disregard of the facts which they contradict For example he tells us in the caption of his last paper that National Prohibition k q Failure. and he really seems to think that people will believe that statement just because John Tweezer" made it. Now if the gentleman would only take the pains to learn the coneensus of public opinion aS expressed by such leading newspapers as the New York Times, New York Herald Kansas City Star. Los Angeles Times Commercial Appeal. Arkansas Gazette and hun dredS of other great metropolitan newspapers or if he will read the edi- torial opinions expressed by such Magazines as Golfers. American. Sat urday Evening Post and practically all the others; or if he will accept the public statements of the governors of nearly all the states in the Union: or if he will give any weight whatever to the testimony of the leaders of the various temperance and reform organ izationS of the country he will learn that all of these editors. officials and pubiciSt< declare with most emphatic 'mphaSis that national prohibition iS pronounced success.
 Again. if he iS not disposed to ac- 'cpt these expressions of opinion from | ncn who are high in professional and 1 business life if he will take the trou- lie to read the Dearborn Independent f Feb 18th he will find therein very