Vermont telegraph. [volume] (Brandon [Vt.]) 1828-1843, 1837-04-12

the OCean-lndeed Wnetner IL WOulu uO| W
a matter of less cost to this nation, TO be at
the expense of transporting it across the At
lantic and emptying into the crater Of Vesu
vius How long before moral, rational
community will discover that here is pub
lie nuisance calling for legislative action?
The following came one mail too late for
our last. We append note or two
To the Editor Of the Vernon, Telegraph.
SIR have Just accidentally fallen up.
on your paper Of the 29th ultimo, in which
observe that you assign as a reason for
refusing the request of "greatIv beloved
FRIEND" that you would publish letter
from me 10 him on the hject of slavery
together with my letter to the Editor Of
the National IntrlIigencer on the same
subject, that l ecantonly and 4Oicked1ya q.
buscd Iyonl last fall, through the me4isn
Of a h1rcling press"
l am very much surprised at th&s OLe-
CATION, and more so at the use U(NSh is
made of it. lift were true, do noN see
how it would Justify the denial Of your
friends request.l) But it is not true. You
are entirely mistaken in this matter. Not
line from me, either wantonly and wick
eddy abusing, or even censuring, you, has
ever appeared in any paper whatever
Sure am that nothing Of the kind ep.
peared on the occasion to which YOU al
lude, because well remember that, upon
your personal attack on me, about the time
ofthe last election, determined, at once,
that | would make no reply whatever, and
expressed that determination to a friend
! a determination which | have faithfully
kept to this day.
will thank you 10 correct the error in.
to which you have fallen, by publishing
this IN your next paper. (2)
Your obedient Servant,
WILLIAM SLApK.
Mddlebury, April 8, 1887.
(l.) 1t is submitted to the decision of cur
readers, whether the reasons offered for de-
Ginning, at present, compliance with our
friends request, were not good and suhstan-
tial We wanted no more controversy, ci-
ther with MIR. Slade or with the print which
is his amanuensis. MIR. Shades productions
now forwarded by our friend, placed US in
the same situation again, in which we were
formerly placed by his article urged upon US
by himself, AS in regard to the former 50
IN regard to the latter, we could not publish
them without comments: and why should
we not now expect that like occasion would
call forth like trea;ment-in other words
why should we not expect that the print "go'
up tor Mr.. Shades benefit" would, as be-
tore: he out upon us with its fury, its vile
misrepresentation and intolerable abuse -
True, the matter was now introduced thT0'
different agency; and we had no fear OF
any thing wrong in our friend. But mark
while reading the manuscript letter, to our
friend from Mr.. Slade at Washington, we
discovered it to have been prepared with tpo
kinds Of ink. This created a suspicion that
the letter had been in Mr.. SHADES hands
since he returned from Congress; and that
probably enough he was now urging him
sell upon the Telegraph through the agency
VI ON' hAGou' w ueIneC t0IS Suspicion was
well founded or not, it will be noticed that
Mr. Slade,. now, in the communication a
boVe, indirectly pushes his articles upon the
Telegraph, by an allusion to our "friendS
request" for them place. 1t is true, it IS
done with more apparent modesty in the
Telegraph, than his claim was made to US
10 the street last fall but whether from dit
ferent designs and motives, we have not the
means of knowing. Be all this as it may
we feel perfectly justified in the course thus
far pursued with our friend, from the first
consideration, viz: that we want nothing TO
de with the print from which we have every
reason to expect repetition of former abu-
sive treatment-if any treatment from sucn
a source ought to be considered abuse. Un~
der any consideration, we wanted nothing 10
do with that print With this course We