The Saturday press., June 01, 1935, Image 2

About The Saturday press. (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1927-1936

Image provided by: Minnesota Historical Society; Saint Paul, MN

                
Tw4
LATIMER FINANCED
THREE CAMPAIGNS
WITH SUCKER MONEY
(Continued from page 1)
he filed his report of campaign
receipts and expenses for that
1932 campaign, that he zvas con
ceding the receipt of money and
"other things of value!" Let me
enumerate a few of these “other
things ?
There were more than one
thousand signs asking the voters
to ELECT TOM LATIMER
JUDGE! At even two-bits
each they were worth two hun
dred and fifty dollars —and they
were worth more than that even
if painted by non-union labor
and posted over the county and
city by non-union bill posters)
Tom made no mention of these
in his report of election receipts
and expenses for that campaign.
Then there was the cost of many
gallons of paint used to “ground
coat** and letter those signs. Was
that paint donated ? Admit that
it was—which it wasn’t —and we
find that the Corrupt Practices
Act war violated anyhow! And
by the men who stood behind
the scenes and guided the ouster
suit against Mayor Bainbridge
out year later!
In addition to the sheet iron
signs—more than one thousand
of them —there were scores of
large banners, painted in a non
union shop by non-union work
ers and stamped, later, with the
Craft Union stamp secured
'/trough the friendship of a “un
ion” painter. Consistency, thou
art a pip!
If any Latimer admirer thinks
I am telling a lie about these
matters, 1 suggest that he take a
look at the records. They were
there on file on May 27. But
let’s step along to the municipal
election of two years ag0 —1933
—when Latimer sought to win
the office of mayor:
Tom filed an election report
recount,' according to law (?)
with the City Clerk. That re
port is a public record and can
l:e seen any day during office
hours. And here’s what Tom
raid, under oath:
That his campaign expenses
totaled only three hundred forty
one dollars and fifty-six cents.
(He was strong for that fifty-six
cents).
And again he neglected to
itemize in his expense account
the cost of more than one thous
and of those phony “Union'*
signs. Why? Wait a moment
He declared under oath that
he had no receipts! He listed
none. Let’s see about that item:
He accepted one campaign
contribution from a slot machine
“spreader” and another three
hundred from a very loyal
henchman. Want his name,
Tom? Both of these names?
I’ve got ’em.
A total ef six hundred dollars
at least —yet in his sworn affi
davit as to his election expenses
and receipts, still on file in the
City Clerk’s office, he lists “re
ceipts, none.** He was financing
his own $341.56 campaign —with
at least six hundred dollars of
sucker money!
Now, my unknown, you phon
ed me for information, are you
getting it? Do you think “the
Old Man** is full of prunes?
Just writing to fill space?
You told me during our short,
but to me, interesting, conversa
tion over the phone, that you
had turned in a healthy contri
bution to Tom’s campaign fund
two years ago. Well, what ever
you handed over, you can add to
the six hundred two other suck
ers turned in —and the chances
are that if you’ll check these
items over with still othef suck
ers you'll find there are lots of
’em . But Tom declared under
oath, and it’s a matter of public
record, that he had no receipts
and had only three hundred forty
one dollars of campaign expense!
Match that one.
Really, you folks who say
your prayers to Latimer instead
of God, isn’t it about time you
zvoke up atid took stock f
But perhaps you took too much
“stock”! Gold mines, woolen
mills, shale oil, hog farms.
Check ’em all over and then ask
yourselves just how much lon-
LOST!
One of the c’:y’s best stor
ies is still circulating among
the newspaper fraternity
around the City HaJl. It gar
gles something like this:
During the municipal pri
mary campaign two years ago,
some jovial gent remarked to
Latimer—the perpetual candi
date—that Soandso had left
fifty dollars with Alderman
Bastis for Tom’s campaign
fund. Tom is said to havj
remarked with a wry grin,
“Hell! That’s the end of that
fifty.** Well it didn’t show on
his election receipt account!
ger you’re going to remain a
sucker crop for Tom Latimer.
But let’s go back to that 1933
election expense and receipt
statement filed with the City
Clerk:
In that campaign, as in the
one twelve months previous,
there were more than one thous
and sheet iron signs put out—
not from .Tom’s headquarters or
a union shop, but from his base
ment and garage! His sworn
statement made no mention of
these signs. Perhaps he didn’t
want his union dupes to know
he had them lettered and scatter
ed by non-union workmen! Ask
him about this, you union fel
lows. It’s no crime to ask ques
tions and you’d better ask a lot
of them before you vote Latimer
in as mayor of this over-grown
village! If you’re at all smart,
you will.
If I'm “all wet” about these
signs being made, painted and
posted by non-union workers, tell
me why Latimer’s election ex
pense account made no mention
of money spent with union work-
THE SATURDAY PRESS
men for signs and bill posting?
Look at your own records.
They’ll tell you more than I
could if I wrote a month with
out stopping. Look at your ozvn
books of records and you’ll find
that I'm telling you the truth!
Go ahead and search your own
records; go down to the city hall
and court house and verify my
figures and then if you want to
vote for Tom, DO IT!
Call me up, unknown, and let’s
have another chat. But take your
time about it. Call me after you
have checked with the friends
whom you talked into contribut
ing to T jm’s campaign fund that
he says under oath NEVER EX.
ISTED! Add your figures to
the ones I have given you in this
article and see where you light.
I’m not lying to you. I don’t
have to lie. Not that I’m too
good, but in this, as in every
other case, the truth is much bet
ter than any lie. And I’m telling
you workers the truth!
I wish five hundred Latimer
former-iupes would do as that
one chap did —wake up! And
when the workers wake to a rea
lization of how long they’ve been
gyped and duped AND FOR
HOW MUCH , that will end the
racketeering Tom’s eternally
yelping about.
Just look at the records and
use your heads. That’s all I ask,
that’s all you’ll require. And
you’ll give Latimer exactly what
he needs:
Another damned good licking.
Now in next week’j issue, I’m
going to tell you how Tom re
paid the Birkeland family for
that seven hundred dollar con
tribution to his campaign fund
in 1932. You’re going to enjoy
THAT article.
The F-L organization is begin
ning to feel the expense of the
city campaign, but intends to go
through all the way—even down
to the taxpayer’s last shirt.
The Minnesota pioneers in the
valley of Matanuska are ponder
ing whether to have dairy cows,
and raise milk, or have just cows
and bulls and raise beef.
We hear the winters are lon*
and cold in Alaska. It’d be a
lot better for the pioneers to
have beef, than milk and honey
promises from the Federal gov
ernment.
In spite of all the New Deal
tactics to raise wages, Henry-
Ford beat them to it. The min
imum wage in Ford plants is
now $6.
A St. Paul jury is to probe the
chain letter racket. Evidence was
presented to the jury that a St.
Paul gambling ring has sent out
hundreds of letters with mem
bers* names heading the list
Members of the gambling ring
are shaking in their shoes, for
it’s just possible (in fact, quite
possible) that several members
of the jury have participated in
the chain letter fad.
And the anger of a sucker
scorned is a terrible thing.
Why Latimer Shouldn’t
Be Elected Mayor
By Seth
The purpose of elections, the
oretically, is to select by the peo
ple’s vote, men who will repre
sent all the people to the best of
their ability, men who will rule
impartially, men who have be
hind them no special “interests.’’
Of course, this is theoretic. In
this day and age no one is sim
ple enough to expect to elect t.>
office an absolutely impartial offi
cial. But it is possible to elect
one who is not merely a “tool,” a
puppet whose policies and acts
are not guided by a partisan or
ganization. .. In New York they
have Tammany; in Minnesota we
have the Farmer-Labor organiza
tion.
Thomas E. Latimer, mayoralty
nominee, is the “tool,” the “pup
pet” of “interests,” of a power
ful political organization, Minne
sota’s Tammany, the F-L ma
chine. If Latimer is elected, he
doesn’t walk into office a free
man, the highest official in Min
neapolis, he walks in the ac
knowledged cringing tool of the
F-L organization. He wouldn’t
dare make a move not approved
by F-L heads.
According to his platform,
Lr.timer favors a liberalized and
humanitarian administration of
public relief. Perhaps he does,
perhaps he doesn’t; it really is
immaterial, since it doesn’t mat
ter what he favors; it matters
what the F-L favors!
Relief, of course, will go on—
in fact, there’ll be quite a few
more added: “reds” and bums
from below and around Union
Square, who are being organized
to repeat the votes (several times
if need be) they cast at the pri
maries. These “unemployed” will
constitute Latimer’s liberalized
and humanitarian administration
of public relief. The F-L tak.»s
care of its own.
Latimer further says, “Every
attack upon our public school
system must be resisted.” Right
there we accuse Mr. Latimer of
meeting himself coming back.
For who else but the F-L organ
ization is attacking our public
school system ? The schools were
one of the prime issues of the
gubernatorial campaign last year.
To the interests of their organiza
tion, F-L-ites proposed tamper
ing with text books, certainly a
“direct attack” on our school
system. What Latimer should
have said is, “Any attack upon
the Farmer-Laborite proposal
for revising the public school
system must be resisted.”
Mr. Latimer continues, “I am
unalterably opposed to any retail
srles tax, city or state.” Mr.
Latimer cannot be unalterably
opposed to anything. He’ll do as
his organization tells him.
Mr. Latimer booms, “I am for
elimination of all the rackets and
racketeering connections between
city government and dishonest
citizens or corporations, large or
small.” Mr. Latimer doesn’t
Latimer Violates Cor
rupt Practices Act
By Seth
In stating or promising who**
will be appointed to any office
after he is elected, a candidate
violates the Corrupt Practices
Act. Nor in any way may a can
didate be privileged to say who
will not be appointed to such or
such an office. The latter is just
what Thomas E. Latimer, mayor
alty nominee, has done, and thus,
in sort of a left-handed manner,
indicated whom he would appoint
—to the office of superintendent v
of police.
Latimer has declared publicly
and positively that Chief of Po
lice Michael Johannes will not be
reappointed to office if the F-L
satelite is elected. By so doing
he eliminates one candidate from
the field and narrows down any
possible choice. There are only
two men in the police department
left for Latimer to choose from
—we won’t mention the names.
However, it isn’t unusual for any
F-L candidate to violate the Cor
rupt Practices Act. Governor
Olson is the main offender—or
shall we say, the whole F-L cor
poration is a violator of the act,
the main offender. Even being a
member of the Farmer-Labor •
machine makes Latimer a viola
tor of the act, outsider of the spe
cific instance of his
that he intends to remove Johan
nes if felected. When Keyes ac
cused Latimer of violating the
act, the F-L candidate denied it,
because as he said, “I make no
secret of the fact that I shall not
reappoint Michael J. ; Johannes
chief of police if I am elected.”
Hypothetically, if a law-breaker
declares publicly that he is a law
breaker, that doesn’t make him
less a law-breaker or less liable
to prosecution. Hence that Lati
mer has made public his viola
tion makes him no less a violator.
Thomas E. Latimer, F-L can
didate for mayor, doesn’t seem to
believe in state laws.
If all the 225,000 persons
whose names are on the registra
tion books vote, Latimer will be , *
defeated.
need to worry his head about,
rackets; his organization will
take care of that for him. As
for being “for elimination of all
connections.. with corporations,”
Mr. Latimer is the representative
of the largest and most expensive
racketeering corporation in Min
nesota, the F-L juggernaut.
Mr. Latimer, all in all, can’t
be for or against anything per
sonally. His organization decides
what he shall be for or against
It’s up to Minneapolis citizens
to decide whether they want a
corporation or a man as the high
est official in the city hall. Lati
mer is not a man, he is a cog in A
machine. That’s good enough
reason why he shouldn’t be elect
ed mayor.
%
June 1, 19.