Democratic Sentinel, Volume 6, Number 33, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 15 September 1882 — AN OPEN LETTER. [ARTICLE]

AN OPEN LETTER.

Rensselaer, Ind , Sept. 14,1882. Editor Rensselaer RepublicanSir: I notice an editorial in your paper of this date, wherein you charge me with outraging common decency, and insulting common sense io a five minute speech made by me “at the Blue Ribbon meeting last Saturday.” If your paper circulated only among those who listened to that “outrageous” speech, I should be content to let them judge of the “insult” to their “common sense,” but your generous criticism will be read by many who bad not that distinguished honor,and therefore I assume the liberty to rail your attention to this fact, and to suggest that you give your readers a synopsis of tlfe speech that you claim “outraged common decency.” You. sir, set yourself before the people of this county as a teacher, and your paper the medium of communicating information to the masses. Some of your readers believe you to be honest, and that you would not misrepresent any fact for partisan purposes. As a public teacher, you ought to be at least fair in giving statements to the public. If that speech, which "would ‘be excusable at a Democratic politi ‘cal gathering, but at a temperance ‘meeting was a good deal worse than ‘in bad taste,” contained statements that were not true in fact, why did you not tell your readers what those statements were, and then, refute them? I answer: It was because you could not —and dare not try! - You say, "In the hope, probably, of 'getting jn a little work for his party, ‘he had the effrontery to assure his ‘audience that the supremely adroit, •but lying and infamous piece of po‘lltioal chicanery, the amendments ‘plank in the Democratic State platform gives to the people—equally ‘wjth the republican platform—assurance that the prohibition amendfments|will be submitted to the peo‘ple.“ In this statement you do me injustice, and practice fraud upon your readers- You make a personal attack «pon me instead of minfully assailing the position I assumed. I am no; a candidate for office, have no “axs to grind,” and am not authorized to speaK for mv party. I claim the right that every citizen enjoys, to en tertain and act upon such opinions o.j the prohibition question as my better judgment tells me is for the best in., terests of the people. I make no war on those whose opinions are different from mine. The Democratic platform speaks my sentiments, as I under sxanci it. And now, s|r, let me pu? this question: Instead of your mak? ing this personal attack on me. why do you not give your readers some reasons why my position is incorrect? If the republican position on these questions is better for the people than the Democratic, you ought to be able to show it in a more gentlemanly maupep than by heaping abus upon those who have the good taste to differ with you. In reply to the closing sentence of your article, permit me to say that, my opinions on the question of Prohibition are nbt bas«d upon any party platform, upon liberal com mon sense and observation -neither of which seem to be entertained by you. You. sir, write like one of those bigoted, illiberal, narrow-minded Pharisees, that “thank God they are not like other men,” and will not admit the fact that pen may honestly entertain ppjnipns pn the question of prohibition different from yours. In my famous speech I referred to Michigan as a State that had tried prohibition for twenty yearsand tailed. I sited the Stat eof Lfai n e as the pioneer in the prohibition movement,” and while I expressly stated that I did not claim to know the results in that State, I raised the question whether the people there were better or more temperate on account of prohibition; and the reason I did not refer to Kansas and lo va, wm because prohibition in those States is an experiment that has not been In use longfenough to produce i any visible results. And now, Mr. Editor, as you desire to be fair and lienest In all your writ ngs for the peo pie. unbiased by partisan prejudice, jn the name of good common sense why dp ygq npf discuss this questiop pf prohibition ip a maply and honor able spirit? And further, why do you wince when some ore utters sehti? meats that may operate against some cherished design oi your party? And finally I request you to publish this, letter and give it the same chance to' reach your patrons that your scurrilous attack on me had;. and hereafter please have the good sense to publish the language that you criticise, that your rtaders may know what you are talking about} Il your position s colroot ft nepd aoj; shun the light. If you dare apt openly advocate prohibition for fear that you may injure the chances of some favorite candidate, then handle the subject with gloves on; apd instead of discussing the p|ain question, keep up the tirade at abuse against all whose words might hurt. Yours, Etc., Cuas, A Edmonds.

The largest assoitment of Guns ever brought to Rensselaer, muzzle and breech loading, single and double barrel. Powder, shot, cartridges aud general equipments for hunting and fishing, at Wm. A. Lamson’s. The finest wood Pump in (lie market, rubber bucket, fine finish, E. W Walker’s. Sold by W. A. Lamson Nowels Block.