Rensselaer Semi-Weekly Republican, Volume 41, Number 127, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 7 December 1909 — MOUNTAIN OF MOLE HILL WITH LIES THROWN IN. [ARTICLE]

MOUNTAIN OF MOLE HILL WITH LIES THROWN IN.

Democrat Editor Comes to Rescue of “Ja®t Guy, Remington Lawyer,” and Maliciously Misrepresents, "In giving an account of the Gus Myers’ suit, against Mghtwatch Holland of Remington, the Republican incorrectly stated that “Jap Guy, a Remington - lawyer,” represented Myers. Mr. Guy was the attorney for Mr. Holland instead of for Mr. Myers and the Republican so learned after the paper obtaining the incorrect statement, was printed and circulated. It was a natural enough error. And yet it was one that might do Mr. Guy some injury, as the Myers’ end of the case was not regarded in a very savory way in Remington nor any place else where the merits of the case were known, and Mr. Guy would probably have refused to represent a client with so flimsy a case. Discovering the error the Evening Republican of Friday evening, published and circulated before the Democrat went to Press, published the following correction of the error: “The Republican was mistaken about Gus Myers’ attorney. He was represented by Gqorge Kassabaum, of Monticello, and Attorney A. Halleck, while Jap Guy represented the defendant and was assisted by Attorney Foltz. Gus made such a poor showing that a good many'wonder that his case ever got into court.” The Democrat of Saturday, printed Friday afternoon, under the caption “Both False and Defamatory,” says “The Republican never neglects an opportunity to give Mr. Guy a rap, against whom it seems to have conceived a most bitter personal dislike. But it ought to have enough fairness and decency to refrain from such barefaced falsehoods as this in order to injure a fellowman and gratify a mean, personal spite.” This is really laughable, for aside front the mention made in the above mentioned article of Mr. Guy and in the same issue a mention about him representing the Morins in three suits against Sheriff Shirer, we feel certain that the name of Jap or Jasper Guy* has not been used in the columns of the Republican, unless by a Remington correspondent, during the four years that the writer has been connected with this paper. Not a line discrediting him has been used by the writer nor by either publisher of the Republican, and we defy the Democrat or any other person to show a line printed in this paper during our editorial control of it, that could be constructed as derogatory to Mr. Guy. It has never been the policy of the Republicah to vent personal spites through its columns. That is a plan of action so carefully looked after by the Democrat and so distasteful to every one that for the Republican to engage in it would be particularly unwise. But we have few personal spites, if indeed, we have any. We feel at peace with the world and if we cultivate any personal spites or dislikes or differences we will settle them without annoyance to our patrons, and for the same reason we have occasionally refused efforts of some good people to use our columns to settle their personal troubles with other equally good people. We would not misrepresent Jasper Guy for anything in the world. He has been in Remington a long time and people there know Just what he is and neither praise nor censure on our part would affect him. In the particular case at issue, he was decidedly on the right side, and his conduct of the case is said to have helped materially in the speedy verdict of the jury in exoneration of Mr. Holland. Probably the Democrat may be able to enlighten the public about its statement that "The Republican never neglects an opportunity to give Mr. Guy a rap, against whom it seems to have conceived a most bitter personal dislike.” As to the part A. Halleck had in the case, we speak with equal freedom. George Kassabaum, of Monticello, took the case and employed Mr. Halleck to assist him. What Mr. Halleck knew of the case he got from Mr. Kassabaum, and he did not learn the true conditions of things until the trial was proceeding. He was as certain as any others that the plaintiff was not entitled to damages and Ije put very little effort into the case. It would probably havd' been more proper for him to have refused any part in it. As regards Mr. Kassabaum, if he is in the habit of bringing caseß| of this kind into court, the sooner his wings are clipped the better. It is scavenger practice and besides the annoyance to the helpless defendant and the expense that it forces on him, it takes ‘up the time of the court that should not thus be wasted.