The Massachusetts spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1821-1823, 1821-10-31


North and the South, the East and the West,
and the Centre and sometimes these "parts''
are subdiVided. In this fullest sense, it might
have been said with truth that the Address
proceeded from citizens assembled from Sc all
parts of the County," The fact is, however,
no such thing as said. The Address purrports
to be from citizens /" assembled from rorio,s
parts of the County" Your correspondent,
Messrs. Printers, must have written in some
perturbation. He mistakes as badly as the
Editor of the Egis, who saw double in looking
for the Chairman of the meeting, and who
las seems from his last paper is still unable dis
tinctly to understand that complicated subject.
The third assertion includes two particulars.
lst. that the Address attempts to palliate the
offence of taking Illegal fees by imputing all
the blame to- Mr.. Ward ; and, Cd. that the
same was done before in DIR. Fiske's letter.
Our concern is with the first of these. We
have already shown that the Address imputed
no blame in this respect to any person. Its
very object was to show that the charge for
taking Excessive fees was 6 unfounded.''-
Again, therefore, we say, and appeal to the
Address itself to decide, that, so far from at
tempting to "palliaten the supposed 6 offehce''
of taking " excessive fees,'' facts were stat
ed, considerations suggested, and testimony
adduced to satisfy the publick, as we had
been, that Doct. Fiske was not guilty of that
offence-so far from g imputing all The baaae''
to Mr.. Ward, he himself is the witness to
prove that there is nothing blameworthy
The second particular in this last assertion
rather claims the notice of DIR. Fiske, or Of
his particular friends. Still as it is made
ground for reproaching the citizens who voted
the Address, it is proper to notice it here
The assertion is, that the Address imputes all
the blame of taking excessive fees to Mr..
Ward, sin The same manner that Doct. Ftske
does, in his letter published in the Spy of the
18th of March last - and then it is asked
Whether it is 6 liberal" or generous or
discovers any thing like ''publick spirits thus
to reproach a man who is innocent and unof-
tending, &c. 1t will be recollected that the
terms quoted above were, applied in the Ad-
dress to Doct Fiske; and there are very few
men in this community who hesitate to admit
that he well merits them. This writer how
ever, means to have it understood that we
bestowed this praise upon one who had for
feited all title to it, by neal-treufing Mr. Ward
Before proceeding further in the examination
OF this strange production, we desire it may
be understood that We do not believe Mr..
Ward to be guilty of authorship these misrep-
RESERVATIONS, or OF sanctoning this abuse Of his
friend and employer. If fame speaks truly,
they have proceeded from an enemy of Doct.
Fiske's, who at the last election opposed Mr..
Ward himself, on the very ground OF fees, and
who now supports him merely for the purpose
OF gratifying personal hostility. This explain
alton is due to the character Of Mr.. Ward-it
is due to the people who generally may not
be aware of the secret history of the opposition
to Doct. Fiske.
Let US now see whether DR.. Fislse's letter
justiiies the above reproach upon hin,, and the
censure upon our Committee. In that letter
there is but single passage which can by
possibility justify it. After mentioning that
when he first came into the Office, he was in
the habit of asking the assistance of the ior-
mer Register, (whose unfinished business de-
tanned him some time in the office) in estimat-
ing the fees upon deed, he proceeds thus
" When he (Col. Clap was not present, in
variably handed it 1.-THE deed to Mr.. Ward,
who, for some years had been Clerk in the
Office, both correct and conscientious IN the das-
charge Of duy.n-" While with Col. Clap, MIR.
Ward wrote by The deed, and received his pay
according to its length. This might be an in
ducement to a dishonest Clerk 10 rate them
higher than would be just. But in my en-
ployment, however dishonest, he could have
no such temptation. | have paid him liberal
allowance by the dag" &c. The reader will
see at once what foundation there is for saying
that both the Address and DR.. Fiskens letter
impute blame g in the same manner'' to Mr..
Ward. DR.. F. relates how, in order to ensure
h., ILL 4 Al
OF 6 correct and conScientiOus'' Clerk. The
Address asserts chat the same Clerk has repeat
eddy made certain declarations as to the mode
of DIR. FPS transacting business. DR.. Fiske's
letter does not contain a single syllable Of the
=" assertion" made in the Address. And yet
this writer says SC the assertion in the Address
Is probably taken from the letter !" DIR. F.
III his letter endeavours to convince The pub
lick OF the improbability of any incorrectness
IN his Office in taking fees, by showing that
his Clerk is correct and conscientious: And vet
this writer accuses him of :" REPRoAcHING a
man achO is innocent and atuofendiag.n If any
thing was waning to prove the character OF
the opposition to DR.. fislze, this monstrous
perverslon of the truth supplies the deficiency.
Who can refrain from manifesting some indig-
nation at such an attempt to represent Mir.
Ward as suffering under the reproaches of
those who have always spoken of him as a
correct and Conscientious man :" The oppo-
sition to the reelection of the present Register
must be ill-founded indeed, when it needs
such props for its support. The publick good
never requires the Misrepresentation of facts,
the perversion of truth, nor the qualification OF
personal hostility. The secret, however, is
now well understood. From q all parts of the
County" we have sure indications that the
tricks which have been resorted to, by the
enemies of DIR. Fiske, will fail of their object.