Decorah public opinion. (Decorah, Winneshiek County [Iowa]) 1895-1928, 1922-11-15
TO THE PUBLIC

There has recently been published
in the 0ssian Bee and in outside
papers, articles criticising my ac-
ton as sheriff and concerning Mr..
Kneeskern's right to vote.
Mr.. Kneeskern asked me as sher>
iff to take him to the polls to vote,
/ then made inquiries from disinter-
ested attorneys as to whether or not
he had right to vote, and was in
formed BY some of the best attor-
news in DEBORAH that he had a right
TO vote and was shown supreme
court decisions regarding his right
10 vote; | then went to the county
attorneys office, taking with me the
decisions by the supreme court and
presented them to the county attor-
ney, and asked him if he had any
decisions regarding case OF this
kind, and asked him to look it up
and if he found any decisions, i
wanted to see them and | would be
back and unless he could show me
other decisions / would take Mr..
Kneeskern to Castalia to vote. My
reason for consulting other attor-
neys is, from the experience | have
had with attorneys interested in a
case, is that they will only listen
from one ear and see from one eye
and especially so in this case judg-
ing by the way this case has been
conducted from the start, and be-
lieve that the public will agree with
me that ] am right in this matter
later. | have done nothing for MIR.
Kneeskeln that ] would not do for
any prisoner that | have in Jail and
have had no complaint before; but
there seem to be some parties VINO
have shown themselves prejudced
against Mr.. Kneeskern for some rea>
son and have been circulating false
stories about him and myself as
sheriff, and my conduct as such.
can see no other reason for them
doing so, than to Try to poison the
peoples mind and get the public pre-
JUDGED against Mr.. Kneeskern. Now
| believe it my duty as sheriff to be
fair with Mr.. Kneeskern as well as
others and | believe it should be
the duty of every official regardless
of who they ale and the public as
we'll and the only way to do that Is
to show no partially to any one.
| here cite supreme court decisions.
A verdict of guilty upon which no
judgment has been entered is not
within the provisions of a statute
excluding from the elective franchise
persons convicted of a felony.
People VS.. Fabian. 1872 n. y. 443.
State VS.. Hamton 103 N. c. 1888.
Gallagher VS.. State 10 Tex. App.
400.
Dial VS.. Commonwealth 142 KY.
50. 90
Gilmore VS.. State 80 XII. Or. 639.
] think the county attorney will
agree with me that is the best inter-
probation of the law.
Editor Schmitz must have been an
a hurry to publish so as to get IN
a little more criticism, as he did not
take time to even learn who did take
Mr.. KneeskeTn to CaStalia to vote
as he states +. w. Cutting accom-
panied the sheriff which is not true,
but he must have been guessing or
dreamt same as some of the othef
stuff that has been handed out, as
some of the; stuff that has been CIR ~
culate ss-->ioslst- eS'>.-- 4 o. ave .sshN ~
ther, but must have come from uhe
underworld. ,,.,,;o,,
| have been sheriff of WinneshieK
county for eight years and l nave
learned that a person has TO KNOW
their own business and pay no at
tention to criticism.
o. o. Ellingson, Sher.n'