By Ryan O'Connor
Staff Writer

Walter Bohlin knew he would not be the most popular person in some circles when he proposed an amendment to negate the warrant article that called for the use of eminent domain to take the land of U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter.

Although the Weare resident and candidate for selectman expected his action to cause hard feelings, he had no idea just how much ill will would be thrown his way after voters approved the amendment at the deliberative session of Weare Town Meeting on Feb. 4.

That night, Bohlin started receiving phone calls from all over country – so many that he said he had to start forwarding them to the police department just to get some sleep. He said many of the callers were threatening and at the very least trying to intimidate him. When he checked his e-mail, he found much of the same.

According to Bohlin, Logan Clements, the California man who began the movement to take Souter’s home and place an inn on the property, sent out a newsletter and posted Bohlin’s name, address, e-mail and phone number on his Web site freestarmedia.com, which says the movement was sabotaged by Bohlin’s amendment.

“By labeling me as a saboteur he is implying that I have done something legally wrong or against the law, which I obviously did not,” said Bohlin. “I simply exercised my right to freedom of speech.”

Clements, on the other hand, said Bohlin and those who voted in favor of his amendment did not allow them to exercise their freedom of petition as defined by the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

“The issue for me is changing the words of a petition after they (200 supporters) signed it,” said Clements while comparing the article to a contract which is legally binding once signed.

“How can that possibly be ethical? How on earth can you possibly exercise your First Amendment rights after the words you wrote are changed?”

As far as posting Bohlin’s name and contact information, Clements said Bohlin is getting what he deserves.

“If Mr. Bohlin did what he did 200 years ago, he would have been tarred and feathered. He is lucky he is only getting phone calls,” said Clements.

He added, “What he did was morally and possibly constitutionally wrong. I think a lot of people would like to talk to him and I am just giving them the opportunity to do that. I like to promote open dialogue.”

Bohlin said his main problem is not with the phone calls and e-mails, but with the apparent lack of knowledge that those contacting him are exhibiting, including one e-mail which labeled him as a representative, which he is not.

“It seems that these people are being misled by Mr. Clements, who is apparently providing them with false information. I am really unsure of the mentality of this group. I think they are being misled by a charlatan whose only interest in this to make money for himself,” said Bohlin. “By providing my information, you are basically opening up an avenue for your followers to do something without actually telling them what to do.”

Still, Bohlin said the phone calls and e-mails have only strengthened his conviction and that he will continue to oppose future endeavors brought about by supporters of the Lost Liberty Hotel initiative.

“I think it’s a terrible thing they are doing, but I am not intimidated. I am certainly not going to change my stance on anything based on these phone calls and e-mails,” he said. “I’ll take an even stronger stance based on the harassment I’ve received.”