The Chronicle star the Moss Point advertiser., 1950-01-27

AAAh1AZV zAe&o
We call the attention of our
readers to the letter on this
page which speaks against our
editorial of last week that op-
posed a state bonus for veter-
ans. We have a few comments.
Name calling does not con-
stitute argument, but rather
confirms the fact that those
who employ il find themselves
able to say only, I'm right,
you're wrong. you snakel"
when asked to present evil
dence supporting their side of
a controversial matter.
7eHul.
We regret therefore. the use
in the letter of such words as
hypocrisy" elastic con-
science" "subterfuge." Com
bination insect and reptile"
We print the communication.
nevertheless. because. effective
OF not. II does come from a
committee officially appointed
by the WV 10 nswer our ed
itorial. We are sisunch uphold
r of the public's right to see
in their newspaper all sides of
a public question. There. fhen,
is what the other side has TO
say on the bonus. Note that is
not an argument for the bonus.
but merely an attack on one
who opposes the bonus.
In its opening paragraph, it
takes issue with a statement
we did not make, an attitude"
we do not have. We are not OBJ
posed to a referendum of the
bonus question. We, like the
VFW, TO use the committees
words, feel that the people of
this state have the right to
vote on the question of wheth-
err the veteran is entitled to
compensation for his war time
losses 4Ts
In the second paragraph, the
committee said it is amazed
to learn that we accepted a
bonus from the state of Louis
lana. lnasmuch as that state
voted a bonus when we lived
there and passed out the cash,
we believe the committee
would have been even more
amazed" il we had refused to
accept ours. Refusal would
have made us a blithcring.
bull-headed unrealist, like the
child who, when his compan-
ions refuse to play the game he
wants to, petulantly pulls out.
leaves the group and enjoys
no game at all. As we were
going to pay back that bonus
through the highest state tax
levy in the nation. we darn
well did accept it, even though
we were opposed to its is
suanee. The committee could
rightly accuse us of "hypo-
Grassy only If we had plugged
for the bonus when it was un-
der consideration. We did not.
In the third and fifth para
graphs. the committee INDUCES
in a favorite game of our sad
gratifying to find some SIMS
ter motivation in the chap who
disagrecs with you. Our opin-
ion on the bonus is not part Of
any underhand scheme. We
are sincerely and honestly
against it and would be Y g
If we were the only man in the
state so minded. AS for the i'm
pllcation that we might have
been "deluded' by Fred Sui
lins-startled laughs from those
who follow the editorials in the
Chronicle. We are not an ad-
mirer of that gentleman. We
have not read a word from his
"vapid pen in more than six
months. Frankly, we are a bit
embarrassed to learn we are
on the same side Of the fence
as Sullens. Bat, with good
courage, we'll carry on.
Our opposition 10 the bonus
is advanced in good faith. 1t is
inspired by no campaign con.
ceived by others. We are sur
prised. therefore. at the com.
mittee's unfounded statements
and their false con~notafions.
We, unlike the committee.
trust in the sincerity of our op.
ponents. 1t would never have
entered our head 10 write. for
example. that the WV. in sd-
vocaiing the bonus. was being
used as a tool of the Commun-
ist party in a program 10
wreck the finances of Missis-
sippi. The veterans who want
the bonus are entitled 10 their
opinion. We respect their opin-
ion. would like ours to receive
-.Y.- 100000 r.--.-