La Grange Journal (La Grange, Tex.), Vol. 50, No. 30, Ed. 1 Thursday, July 25, 1929 Page: 1 of 8
eight pages: ill. ; page 22 x 16 in. Digitized from 35 mm microfilm.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
By B F. Harigel
Volume -50
3ixth Annual Fayette County Fair at LaGrange, September 25, 26, 27, 28, 1929
rang* Journal
Opposite Masonic Building. Published Every Thursday Morning and Entered at the Post Office as Second-Class Matter
Democratic in Principle and a Worker For LaGrange and Fayette County
$2.00 Per Year
LaGrange, Fayette County, Texas, Thursday, July 25, 1929
Number 30
THINGS IN GENERAL
Remarks by the Editor
Last week, when the election was held to
determine whether or not the state constitution
should be amended, and the salary of the gov-
ernor be increased from four to ten thousand
dollars, and the judges of the supreme court be
increased from three .to nine; little interest was
aroused among the voters. It had been liberally
referred to by the press of the state, no quali-
fied voter has the right to say that he knew not
that the electiqn was to be held. Those favoring
the amendments had given their version and the
reason for the adopting of these amendments,
and those opposed, and Jim Ferguson in his
Forum published at Austin, had done their
share to arouse interest and induce the rural
vote to be cast against the adoption of the am-
endments. The returns have informed us all that
the amendments have been adopted. The returns
of the election have also shown us that the adop-
tion of these amendments was made possible as
the result of the smallest number of votes cast
at a special election.
Why this apathy? It is not unreasonable to
state that if those favoring the adoption of the
amendments sought, by generous activity to
arouse interest among the voters, and feet the
people to vote for them they aroused as much
interest on the part of those who did not approve
of the adoption. If the public is interested in one
way, it can be interested in the other way as
well. Certainly, the privilege of voting is not de-
nied the tax payer; if the man who wishes to
increase the governor’s salary and also wishes
to increase the number of personnel of our high-
er court, is bent on casting his ballot for the
amendments, the man who disapproves could do
the same. It would be unfair to say that those
who cast their vote for the adoption, were about
all that were in favor, while those opposed, left
the matter to the others and believed that the
amendment adoption would be defeated.
Yet, as we view the results and note that
not more than one-tenth of the voters were in-
terested, we feel somewhat constrained to be-
lieve that the adoption should prevail. True, no
one was disqualified, those who are over sixty
years of age, and those who had a poll tax re-
ceipt, could have gone to the voting station and
given their expression by ballot. It will be in-
teresting to know, at some future date, whether
the usual complaints about the “politicians hav-
ing handled the affair” will have any merit. Con-
tending, as some did, that because the election
was held at a time when the man on the farm
would be busy, and would not care to take the
time to vote, we might have an argument, yet
that argument is worth little. We have seen, in
the past, that the farmer had time to vote in
mid-summer, and did vote, when candidates for
office were making a canvass, and some of their
friends were discrediting the opposition. If it
was of interest to them to go and vote for an
Incompetent candidate, it was of interest to
them to go and cast their ballot for a change in
the great document that means much to our
state. Rather far-fetched, this contention.
Whenever amendments are submitted to
the people, unless these amendments are voted
upon at a general election, the vote is generally
small. This being accepted as true, encourages
the belief that the greater majority of the voters
do not know what such amendments mean. Ad-
ding to that, it can be said, that the majority of
the voters take little interest in amendment
elections, and are prone to leave the results of
such election to be determined by the city voters.
In this election of last week, it was shown that
a great many of the rural voters had cast a bal-
lot, and that they voted against the amend-
ments, while the city vote, especially in the large
cities of Texas, was cast for the adoption of the
amendments. In proportion to the vote cast, it
seems that the majority for the amendments
was greater than was anticipated, and that the
vote cast was a surprise.
-o-
Distributing Favors Among Party Men
Disappointing to New Recruits.
According to published reports and which
reports seem to be based on fact, there is dis-
appointment in the ranks of the democrats who
threw off the party yoke last year, and voted for
the republican electors, to put in Herbert Hoover
as president; disappointment that is very keen.
These bolters, albeit their leaders, had encour-
aged the idea that because the state went for
the republican party in the national vote, they
8hould be considered, and that a large slice of
OUR WEEKLY POEM
THE IRISH HEART
(By Franklin Pierce Carrigan)
The Irish heart is loving
And changeless to £he end,
No matter where the pathways
Of time or fortune wend.
It leaves no one forsaken
In storms of snow or rain,
And sings a song of gladness
To ease another’s pain.
The Irish heart is constant,
And freely gives away,
Not asking if its treasure
Will be returned some day.
It holds as bleak and barren
The gain that many prize,
And seeks the lasting guerdon
That deep in kindness lies.
The Irish heart remembers
With faitK* and tenderness
The favors that were given
In sorrow and distress.
Its emblem is the shamrock,
Or else the clover true;
God 'grant through all your lifetime
Some Irish heart loves you.
the pie should be given to the bolting democrats.
We fail to see how they get that way. Believing
as we do, that were the two parties more evenly
matched, we would have more satisfactory re-
sults, does not force the additional belief that
because one has bolted his party for once, he
should tell the heretofore weaklings in a nation-
al election in Texas, in what manner the pie
should be cut. It places the bolters in a very bad
light; and it is amusing.
Another feature of this bit of information
makes itself felt; these bolters are stealing the
so-called principle of some of the republicans
who have often been charged with being repub-
licans only because there is a federal job to be
had, if they wish'it. This won’t set well with
the bunch, yet who cares? The truth will pre-
vail. On the other hand, if one takes into con-
sideration the fact that the demos have been
kept away from the national trough so long,'and
have sought constantly to take a bite at the pie
and have been forced away, any opportunity to
get there now will be embraced. It isn’t to the
liking of the better demos at all, but it is to the
liking of many. If this were not so, there would
have been no such dictation to the republican
chief, as we have been informed about recently.
Republicans, voters who have been loyal to
their party in the face of continuous defeats in
this state, should be given first consideration.
This applies in every branch of industry and has
the same force in matters political. When we set
about to “cuss out” the devlish and depraved
republicans—with apologies to the departed
George Bailey—and all because they have held
the whip, it does not savor of consistency to
dictate to the big chief in Texas, and seek to
force him to favor us because we have turned
our backs on the regular democratic crowd, and
strayed away. Repeating, as we have always
done in the past, that if voters become indepen-
dent and cast their vote because of a choice and
not a party dictation, that such voters are valu-
able assets to a state and nation, we do not drop
a contention and line up with a minority and
adopt their tactics because they are peeved.
Interesting as elections generally are, this
one of last November eclipses all heretofore
presented. The aftermath, or sequel, however,
is even more interesting. Interesting the more
because there is so much displeasure voiced at
some of the maneuvers of the party men now in
power. These boys who set up such a loud howl
and feel that there is no justice in election re-
sults, and that the party they helped so vigor-
ously to get back into power is arrogant, have
no grounds to stand upon. They may be likened,
in the position that is their’s at this time, to the
man who painted the kitchen floor and forgot
to paint toward the opening of the room. When
he found himself standing in the small squared
circle, he had to make a decision; either walk
across the fresh painted floor and spoil his work,
or remain standing in the small square until the
paint dried. Rather tough, we admit, but then,
what else could they have expected to receive?
We see again, that in political scraps there is
always a bug under the chip.
PERILS OF “NECKING”
From The Louisville Courier-Journal
“Necking” has been dismissed from concern
by mature minds as simply new terminology for
an ancient practice. It is one of the minor in-
discretions for which the motor vehicle has not
been blamed. The embrace and the accompany-
ing salute were not unknown to covered-wagon
days, certainly not to the horse and buggy. Con-
temporary humor had its laughs at the run-
aways caused by Old Dobbin’s misinterpretation
of the sound produced by lips, hermetically
sealed, tearing apart.
But it seems that “necking” has introduced
a new technique. A serious-minded pathologist
solemnly informs the American Society of Clini-
cal Pathologists that “people kiss more strenu-
ously than they did 15 years ago and the result
is a spread of mouth diseases.” Resulting trau-
matic injuries, it might be judged, become in-
fected, but one would expect so violent a caress
to present symptoms of a corresponding strain
on the tendons of the neck. They would explain
the nomenclature, and their absence may ac-
count for the cause.
The doctor who has uttered this timely
warning doubtless covered a wide field of ex-
perimentation and observation. No sacrifice is
too great for the scientific spirit. He doesn’t
practice in Hollywood, else he might be criticized
for generalizing upon purely occupational patho-
logy. Neither is it to be assumed that the same
people “kiss more strenuously than they did
fifteen years ago.” Psychologists who adhere to
the curve of emotional imputae and the theory
of languid reaction to a repeated stimulus de-
clare than fifteen years will wear a kiss down to
a contact so brief and insecure that a germ has
to be alert or make the jump at the risk of life
and limb. Traumatic conditions for germ culture
are lacking under these circumstances.
Presumably these are diseases of adoles-
cence and early maturity. Science has done its
part in revealing the cause and effect. The pre-
vention is a subject for the public health ser-
vice, and that beneficent institution may find
itself hoist on its own petard. For as many years
as science says over-strenuous salutes have been
in fashion the public health service has been
encouraging physical exercise and muscular
vigor. It is this latter element, in the kiss, which
the pathologist blames for the epidemic. It prob-
ably is called “necking” because an athletic neck
is necessary to genuine appreciation. There real-
ly doesn’t seem to be anything science can do
for the safety of osculation except resort to
inoculation. It can not expect gentler methods
from a stronger race. >
These Things Grow Worse Because They
Create Unfriendly Feeling^
From Texarkana—across the line, not in
Texas—comes the report from the enforcement
officers,, as follows: “Our war on women boot-
leggers in Arkansas has just begun.” Now, isn’t
that just too bad? How many of you good people
of Texas have thought that it would be flashed
under your nose and optics, that the enforce-
ment officers would make such an unfriendly
remark? War on women bootleggers has just
begun; now, taking this a little seriously, doesn’t
it make you feel queer? And, since we have
adopted the equal rights measure and have fol-
lowed the lamented president and the tyrannic
legislature of Texas, and given the good women
the right to vote, and to have a say in every-
thing that pertains to the management of our
governments, are we not presenting some real
spicy things to the world?
Probably, if not possibly, we are making
much ado about nothing; probably we are not.
To the average man this thing of referring to
women bootleggers is showing lack of that old
chivalrous spirit which formerly held such firm
hold on the manhood of the South. Away back
in those good old days—they tell us they were
good old days, we had no life at that time-
women did not, unless they were of the unedu-
cated mountain clans, ever give liquor a thought.
The aristocracy—and aristocracy that came near
destroying the South—would have been shocked
had it become known that the women were so
defiled. The chief southern home was a kingdom
in itself, where the head of the family reigned
with a kind yet firm hand, and the woman of
the home, the wife, was regarded as equal to
if not better than a queen. We are now being
told what that little dispatch in quotation tells
us. It would have meant deat^i “in those good
GOLDEN GOLD
From The Beeville Bee-Picayune
To the dairy farmer v/ho turns his feed-
stuffs into golden cream, comes the golden eagle
of the American dollar. To him comes prosperity
of real farm life. To him comes no “laying-by”
time, but a continuous flow of golden gold. The
good dairy cow is unequaled when it comes to
regular production. She pays a good price for
the labor that is required in caring for her. She
is the balance wheel to the smoothly running
farm machine.
The agricultural extension department o£
the Atlantic Steel Company says that 14 cows
net John Manning of Montgomery County, Ten-
nessee, $150 per month over labor and feed
costs. George Goodman, who lives near Byhalia,
Mississippi, says he makes more money from
fifteen cows and with less trouble than he did
from a six-mule share crop on cotton land.
Robert S. Pesson' of Iberia Parish, Louisiana,
milks an average of 35 cows the year round. His
average gross income from milk is $1,000 per
month.
“In 1910 there were two struggling banks
in Pendleton County, Kentucky, with combined
deposits of $27,000, and was next to impossible
to borrow money on land. As a result of con-
certed effort to promote sideline dairy farming,
the county now has an income of more than
$75,000 per month from her 37 cows per square
mile, and bank deposits that have grown at the
rate of $200,000 a year to a total of more than
$3,000,000 in her five banks.”
“Dairying has developed in PulaBki County,
Arkansas, to the extent that $1,500,000 worth
of dairy products are sold in that county annu-
ally, or at the rate of $3 per minute. The coun-
ty’s 1929 farm program embraces the elimina-
tion of every scrub bull, the purchase of pure-
bred bulls and registered stock ^gypry commu-
nity, the production of at leasjtr two tons of le-
gume hay for every dairy cow, and a permanent
pasture of at least one acre for every dairy cow.
Sixteen years ago Mississippi’s one creamery
paid $4,423 for milk. Last year the state pro-
duced $14,000,000 worth of milk.”
The recent installation of butter and milk
plants in East Texas' has increased the dairy
industry in that section to a higher mark than
has ever been reached in history. The offer to
Beeville for such a plant has given a chance to
Bee Countians to develop a dairy industry here
that would be unequaled in the South. There is
no question about the dairy herds in this sec-
tion. The cows are here. What they need is the
plant, a market place. Just what a sweet cream
butter and powdered milk plant would mean to
Beeville would take days to tell. It would mean
more than any other project now on docket.
old days” to any man to refer to our southern
women as bootleggers.
Never mind about the criticism, this com-
ment will never effect the innocent because they
are not being taken into ^consideration. This
comment is provoked because the news comes
from Arkansas—through one of the enforce-
ment officials—that “seventy-five per cent of
the bootlegging in Arkansas is carried on by
women.” We are one of those whose attention
has been called to a statement that women make
better sales agents than men, because they have
more tact and magnetism; if that is fact, and
not fancy, the situation in our adjoining state
is not to be regarded as unusual. Last week we
were told by the Houston papers that white
women were brought into the federal court room,
and tried on the same day that the negro boot-
leggers were tried, and that the judge had to
forget his trend of mercy and give the women
the same fine and prison sentence that he gfcve
to the colored which seems to be called to re-
primand so frequently?
What has brought this lack of self-respect ?
Is it true that man, because of his superior in-
telligence—which we doubt—has forced the un-
fortunates because of their position, to become
common felons and drift away from the side of
respectability? Or—get this sarcasm, please—
is it now classed as a matter of distinction to be
a good bootlegger? Arkansas, it seems, is not
alone with troubles of this nature; that scene
in the federal court room at Houston, with a
mother standing before the judge, and her little
son standing at her side, hearing the words that
convict her, isn’t pleasant to contemplate. When
a crime is committed, and the testimony shows
(Continued on page four) ,
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
La Grange Journal (La Grange, Tex.), Vol. 50, No. 30, Ed. 1 Thursday, July 25, 1929, newspaper, July 25, 1929; La Grange, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth997967/m1/1/: accessed July 12, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting Fayette Public Library, Museum and Archives.