Politics: Frank L. Shaw, John Wasson, S. J. Harper, 1908, Winn Parish, LA
Submitted by Greggory E. Davies, 120 Ted Price Lane, Winnfield, LA 71483
**********************************************
Copyright.  All rights reserved.
http://usgwarchives.net/copyright.htm
http://usgwarchives.net/la/lafiles.htm
**********************************************


 



From: February 21 or 28, Southern Sentinel

Attack Upon Mr. Frank L. Shaw

We have been shown a letter which had been mailed to the voters of Winn Parish
from Winnfield signed by Mr. S. J. Harper, who has taken active charge of
Mr. Wasson's campaign.  He starts out giving credit to Mr. Wasson for the
calling of the recent extra session of the General Assembly, which passed the
constitutional amendments and acts which curtailed the fees charged for the
collection os taxes.

During the first primary we supported Mr. R. H. Fletcher and in this election
we have no interests except as a Democrat editing a Democratic journal and as
far as lay in our power to see that the principles of Democracy are strictly
adhered to.

We should not have noticed the letter had not the advice given in the last
clause been so radically opposed to Democratic principles and the primary
election law.

He says do not mind the challenges but vote for Wasson and reform.  As we
understand it, this election is being held under the auspices of the
Democratic Executive Committee, and any one who offers to vote in that
election will have to qualify themselves as Democrats before they can vote. 
None but Democrats should be allowed to cast their vote in a Democratic
primary, and anyone who votes in the primary whether he is challenged or not,
announces to the public that he is a Democrat, and this ____ him from taking
part in other party primaries or _________movements and subjects ____ to fines
and penalties, under the primary election laws.

Charges made without specifying the special acts or statements made which does
not give figures, or misleading figures, recoils on the men who name, or the
party in whose interest it is made.  We notice in this statement by Mr.
Harper, that he has taken the year 1907 as his basis to show the receipts of
the sheriff's office, when in truth the assessment of 1907 was more than twice
as much as the assessment of 1904, and 1905 was very little improvement over
1904.

"Mud slinging" never won in any campaign, and generally the thrower gets
bespattered.  Mr. Shaw's letter, published in this issue, seems to us, is a
thorough explanation and refutation of the charges made by Mr. Harper.