Rensselaer Union, Volume 11, Number 52, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 11 September 1879 — A Shameful Outrage. [ARTICLE]

A Shameful Outrage.

A Washington City Democrat institutes a parallel between the shooting of Kalloch in San Francisco and the assassination of Dixon in Yazoo City. The striking peculiarity of this attempted parallel consist in its defense of the Yazoo assassination and its condemnation of the alleged threats of the SandLotters of San Francisco, “to sack the pity and lynch thek political oppo-

nent.” He says: “I* MiMisaippi i» the refuge of fiends, what ia California? If Yazoo City should be swept from the face of the Sarth or sown with salt, what of San Francisco?” There is no parallel between the two cases. Nobody pretends for an instant that the shooting of Kalloch was the result of any political design whatever. 1 here was a political controversy raging, which degenerated into a purely personal quarreL and quarrel ended in the shooting of one of the parties to it by the other. Neither is it true, in point of factath at the “Sand-Lotters,” as a body, threatened to sack the city and lynch 'their political opponent. “Give the devil his due,” is an old saying which possesses binding force over the minds of all just men. Kearney couseled moderation, and the “ fsand-Lotters” dispersed peaceably; and it is one of the most notable instances of conservatism following close in the wake of responsibility that ever came to our attention. But suppose the Sand-Lotterff did threaten to sack the city and lynch their political opponent? ' They didn’t do either, 'lhe order-loving people and the authorities of San Francisco took care that they should not succeed in either in the event of the attempt being made. How was it in Yazoo County? A Democratic mob assembled ana threatened Dixon, the Independent candidate, with death in the eveht.of his refusal toretire from the political canvass. He did not retire, and they employed a cowardly, ruffianly Democratic candidate for office to shoot their unprepared victim in the back! And neither the authorities nor the citizens of Yazoo County raised a hand to prevent the threatened, impending brutal homicide. Kalloch prefaced his wordy assault upon De Young.by the announcement that “he felt justified in using the most vicious language of which he should be capable,” and followed up the announcement by offering the greatest personal provocation of which mere words are susceptible. On the other hand, Dixon declared with his dying breath that no cause of personal quarrel whatsoever existed between himself and his assassin. Thus every feature of the two eases, instead of showing a parallel, exhibits a striking contrast. The same is true of the resultant events following the two shooting as-

fairs. The shooting of Kalloch was denounced as cowardly, barbarous and the provocation, by nearly all the journals of San Francisco, and almost universally condemned by local public opinion. On the other hand, with a single exception, every paper in Mississippi, so far as we know, sustains both the mob which threatened to kill and the assassin who shot Dixon; and we have yet to learn of the Democratic citizen of Yazoo County wljohas raised his voice in condemnation of either the threats or the actual killing. The Democrat who assumes the task of instituting a parallel between these two cowardly, brutal affairs is either a knave or a fool. In the case of the shooting of Kalloch, DeYoung alone is guilty; he usurped the law to be avenged of a personal insult of a very gross nature; and, in the event of the death of his traducer and victim, the law which he defied will be invoked for his punishment. In the case of the assassination of Dixon, the Democratic party of the State of Mississippi stands accused of murder! Barksdale, the coward who fired the fatal shot, and his accomplices posted with shotguns in doorways and alleys ready to pour in a volley in the event of his failure to kill—these were mere agents of the Democratic party of a sovereign State! It is very diificult for tlxe civilized people of the North to conceive of a political party so abandoned, so brutal, and so bloodthirsty. And it is still more difficult to comprehend the cowardly character of Northern Democratic leaders who have no word of condemnation for such savagery. But there the Democratic party of Mississippi stands before the high court of public opinion, its garments dripping with the blood of its victim, charged with the crime of a deliberately-planned and coolly-executed assassination! And here, in the clear light of Northern civilization, trying to hide away from the shame of its vile association, but afraid to speak lest it shall be taken at its word and challenged to aid in the suppression of bulldozing—here stands the Northern wing of the Democratic party charged with the guilt of complicity in the crime of murder for political effect!— Chicago Tribune.