Rensselaer Republican, Volume 17, Number 9, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 6 November 1884 — Some Personal Remarks. [ARTICLE]

Some Personal Remarks.

The good people of Keener are to be complimented upon their conduct during the exciting time succeeding the discovery of the late horrible murder in their town ship. i Their prompt, intelligent and effective work is proven by the fact that within three duys after the discovery of the body, they had got well to the bottom of the matter, had followed up many clues and rumors, had uncovered hidden secrets, and brought to light seemingly overwhelming proof of the guilt of the accused man Wartner, and although lynching was freely talked of, good management and w*ise counsel, upon the pari of the cooler heacleu citizens, having the matter in charge, prevented any outbreak. Our Holland citizens are entitled to much credit for their prompt and effective assistance. All have done their duty, and done it well; and we regret that we have noi time and space to mention the many names of those deserving especial credit.

To JSldcr I). T. Halstead: Sib: —In the last issue of the “Democratic Sentinel” of this place there appeared a communication of some length to which was attached your name, anti which, I Rave not thetslighteet doubt , is authentic and the veritable production of your hand. The article was published with a .two-fold purpose, evidently. You wished to do what harm you could to one of the two great political parties, and you also wisheu to inflict mjury upon the editor of this paper. The political aspect of your letter! will not not now consider, as the time for that has passed, and i will only pause to remark that your action in publish • ing such a letter, just on the evo of election, and too late, as you well knew, to be publicly disputed, savored much more strongly oi the tricks ot the ungodly than ol what should be the conduct of a* professed follower of Christ and a minister of his holy gospel. It is, however, quite simitar in spirit though much less flagrant in character, to your alleged conduct, a few weeks ago, when you, and others ■working under your direction, induced a number of Republicans to sign a call for a prohibition county convention by pretending that n was a call for a meeting! for consultation simply, when in point of fact the call was so worded as to invite to the convention only those who endorsed the prohibitionists’platforms, and their tickets. This call, 1 repeat yourself -and others induced men to sign, or rather perhaps induced* them to consent that you should sign for them, by misrepresenting its real nature. Your letter in the Sentinel opens with these two sentence s. Editok Sentinel:—At tlie risk oi hfcsiug thought ev-m unworthy of courtesies, extended through your columns, I yet ask a little space -to \ indicate the action of your cotemporary u; the Republican organ in reiusing to publish that little proposition for investigation- He doubtless was not at l.berty to do so. Your remark, in the above quoted lines, that you ask for the space in the feentinel for the purpose of vindicating the editor of this paper, is not only flippant st ud undignified, but it is also hynoeviti-' caTand false You well know,! Elder Halstead, that vou did not ask for that space to f“vindicate” m? but rather you wished to wreak a little i>etty and most ungrateful spite against me, and, at the same t* l3l6 ’ in 80m e work for your political party. Your assertion m the second sentence above quoted, that I “was doubtless, not at hberty to publish your, so-eall-e ~» proposition for investigation” although not true, in any tease, 1 pass by, assuming, with the charity which you talk about but do not exercise, that you believed that it was true, although it scarcely seems possible „ that you should have so believed, in view of the fact that I have published everything the prohibitionist* have avar

asked me to publish, with the exception, if it is to be reckoned an exception, of a certain egotistical Bud illy worded challenge to a joint discussion, and which you speak of, in the above quotations, as a “proposition for investigation”. I repeat, that in view of the facts, (which you well knew) that I had published all the political matter for the prohibitionists that had been presented to me, and that, too, without money and without price, it seaicely is credible that you could really believe that the leaders of the republican party could have objected to the publication of a thing so entirely harmless as was the “proposition”, yon speak of, or even that 1 should have taken the trouble to consult with those so-called “leaders” (whoever they may be,) in regard to the matter. Besides what I have already quoted your letter, as it appears in the bentinel, is as follows: My Republican brother, if you do not, you should know, that he can publiah such as our leading brethren think would be best for our party, and of course they know that such investiga- ‘ Lion would let the blinded ones know. ••This short way to prohibition 1- by a •ew constitution was simply a humbug to catch temperauce votes, because they knew lirst by the provision ot the i,ns:ituliou itself the Legislature was powerless to do more at first than to recommend to the people to call a convention; second, that they would be 'owerless to cariy a vote for such .a recommend even if they wanted to, for : hey knew they could not elect 19 out of 25 senators, u»liich t..ey would have to control the senate (18 Democrats and 7 Republicans bolding over..) Oi he Democrats holding over some were pledged to submission of amendment, out none for the new constitution. Then of course all they would have to ■>ay would be “The Democrats defeat t; just wait. -- (1 wonder Why not one Republican orator even makes allusion : o that great necessity for a new constitution?) And then if these things were not known it would hurt “our party.” You may not realize that it requires a great deal of discretion to successfully carry out a pretended special friendship for two antagonistic p arties or principles. A«d you know oe r great leader thinks the t>9st Way to play mum, as he did on the vote for or against prohibition in his own state. Now you should remember that- the position of such an editor is a very tryug and delicate one. Therefore we should all exarciss duo charity. D. T. Halstead. Just what you mean by the wretched, illogical and ungrammatical jumble of words in the first six or seven lines last quoted, would be hard to say. If you mean, however, to assert that the columns of The Republican have been under the supervision of anyone but myself, and that I have not exercised my own discretion as to what T should publish, you state what is not true. For the remainder of your letter I pass over all the political points in silence. It is now too late to answer them to any purpose, a fact which you probably had in mind when you wrote the letter. To the two following sentences, however, I will call your attention: “You may not realize that it requires a great deal of discretion to successfully carry out a pretended special friendship for two antagonistic parties ot principles.” and, “Now you should remember that the position of such an editor is a very trying and delicate one, therefore we should all exercise due charity The whole spirit and context of your article plainly shows that you mean to be understood as refeniug to me in these remarks. The implications which they convey are not tireless false and slanderous because they are covert and- cowardly. The concluding phrase of your letter: “Therefore we should all exercise due charity” I cannot regard as otherwise than hypocritical anu insincere, when I take into consideration the obvious fact that one of the chief objects ; you had in writing your letter was \ to hold me up to the reprehension jof this community as a man who J tries to “carry out a pretended j special friendship” <Vc., and an ■ editor who lacked the self respect i and independence ot spirit to be [other than a weak tool iu the i hands of others. Mr. Halstead you know, iu your heart, that j when you wrote that letter you 1 meant to do me an injury, and your j attempt hide your malice under a hypocritical pjea for charity i) especially reprehensible iu one whose very profession it is to teach and practice the sweet precepts of the Divine Master. It should be remembered, too, that the only possible grounds you can have for your displeasure ifc that for wine rw»«9j (<tml R@v§r

made the least effort to ascertain what that reason was) a certain brief notice which you handed me for insertion in Ttf# Republican was not published. Now whatever may have been the reason for the non-publication of that notice, and it certainly was not the reason you rashly and unjustly assume it to have been, (but simply because 1 it was mislaid, and not thought worth searching for) you were not justified in attacking me in the manner you did. As a minister and a man of God you should, first of all, have made sure that the tilings which you impute were realty true, and having made sure on those points, and finding that I was pursuing a wrong course, in any particular, you should have made a friendly effort to induce me to turn from that wroug course and to redress the wrong that I had done, before you resorted to so severe a' measure as holding me up to public censure, iu a public newspaper. As a member of the prohibition party you should have remembered that the party, in this county, has received every favor from The Republican they have ever asked for. In conclusion I will take the occasion to remark that you may. very likely, have believed that your priestly profession, and the high regard in which your private virtues are held in this community, would restrain me from making a deserved reply to your attack. If such should be the view yourself or your friends take of the matter, I will only remark that your priestly office should, have restrained you from making such au unjust and uuchristianly an attack upon any one. Furthermore, you should have remembered that the very facts that you are a minister of the gospel and a man of exalted private character, increased, many fold, the injunousness of your action. Hoping that tne next time you attempt to benefit your party, or to punish an individual, througu the public journals, you may not while you have the word “chanty” on your tongue have injustice and ingratitude m your heart, I subscribe myself, Yours &c.,

G. E. MARSHALL.

There are still seveial schools of the county without teachers, and a special examination of teachers will be held at the school building in this place .Saturday, Nov. 15th.