Vermont telegraph. [volume] (Brandon [Vt.]) 1828-1843, 1842-04-27

| the Board This turned OUT to be az false as the
other-but was the least alsehood Of the three be-
cause il came from an individual only. Now the
Committee say - knowing that the delegates from
\ large portion Of the churches were present we
supposed that the circumstances Of our appointment
would be sufficiently understood without going in
to them further" Herein is contained what pro-
nounce TO be the third AagraLt falsehood. II, on
the one hand, they to be understood that the
persons comprzing this caucus were acting in this
thing as delegates from the churches authorized
to transact this private business-it is false They
were sent there to transact public business, in
public manner-and with no instructions, SO far as
it pertained TO most of them, and presume every
Of them, in reference the business transacted
in this conclave. What was there done, was done
by individuals, their own responsibility. IT. on
the other hand they design be understood as the
connection makes it more probable that the large
proportion of the delegates from the churches
which they speak Of was ANY such number as
would carry the intelligence of the transaction as it
was, personally, with their own mouths, to the
churches generally-this is also false, and they
know it. deny that it was any such general
meeting, and call on them to publish Names show
ing the truth of their pretensions. 1t was only
such clan as Joseph Freeman could draw around
him. As brother G. A. Thomas told me, at the
time he ccntradicted /" Deacon Griggs' statement
la few brethren got together in brother Hotch-
kiss study and did it. Even brother Thomas
himself was not present. But this was the repre-
sentation of the thing given him. have inquired
diligently, and have never been able to get any
other representation of it-except the published
false pretensions of this Committee, given for effect
together with " Dea." Griggs' statement. There is
another thing about it. They appear to pretend
that true representation of the case must have got
to the churches through the delegates present.
Now so far as it pertained to this region the first
noise OF the matter that was heard, represented
just as the Committee represented in their address
published In the specimen number of the Journal,
that the getting up of the thing and the appoint
ment of the Committee was an ACT of the Conven-
ton. had occasion to contradict statement that
was going the rounds and giving such version of
the case, in less than ten days after the session of
the Convention at Poultney. presume the same
view of the case was spread in other directions.
The wretched cant of the Committee, in regard
to the "waste Off and paper it has occ asoned,"
Is characteristic If the waste ofmy ink and paper
Is the principal cause Of regret with Them it shows
how reckless and regardless they are OF truth
They manifest no regret that they have stated a
falsehood. Aslong they afford to find swear
and tear" ofconscience for dealing in falsehood,
will endeavor to conrive ways and means to furnish
ink and paper" for exposing them. I have al
ready npscards fttOentg new subscribers in Bran
don, since their Copvention was held here-the
most of whom have entered their names voluntarily
from having witnessed the clandestine proceedings
of the Convention, or have given their names at
the suggestion ofothers who attended and behed,
The small profits from these will help me along
some, in obtaining ink and paper"
The most pitiful and pitable of all the things
that appear in this s'uindication" of the Commit
lee is, their closing argument O. to prove that
they ought not to be supposed to have been so
foolish to be SO dishonest-in other words, that
there ought to be more confidence reposed in
their heads, than to suppose they would allow
their hearts to be so corrupt! The same argu-
ment would be equally forcible and conclusive in
the mouths of men-stealers and all other daring
sinners. ''How could we hope to avoid detec-
ton for single day." They did not avoid de-
lection whether they hoped to or not. And
what then! Does this prove that they are not |
guilty! By no means-any more than the same
argument would prove that the STAKEHOLDER, the
forger, the public defaulter, or any other felon
could not be guilty. Suppose that Benjamin
Rathbun had come forward in court, and, to prove
himself innocent, had asked--ss how could hope
to avoid detection for single day? Whatever
may be thought Of my integrity and candor, how
could have any possible motive in the case, to
make such miserable attempt at deception!"
The Z" attempt" was miserable enough, to be
sure, in both cases. But would such plea have
cleared Rathbun in the minds of the discerning
and intelligent The plea would have been as
good for him as 1t is for this Committee "Wbat
possible motive," SC. The motive with Rath-
bun, il is plain, was money. The motive with
ne Committee, it is equally plain, was public IA
Vor. They, it's true, provided, in their artful
'hoice of words, way for ''backng OUT if they
hould be driven 10 il. But they have failed to
secure TO themselves the benefit of their own cum
ling provision, by waiting to be so hard driven +,
'eiore they would avail themselves of it. But q
hat makes it still worse for them, in connection
With taking themselves to their last resort they {
ave committed another outrage upon the Truth, I
lot unlike the former. Before the three men I
whose names are attached to the document I am
low commenting on, venture too far on their own {
redit for Integrity and candor,'' let them make
different exhibition of themselves from what
hey have in the Telegraph in times past.
P. s. If this Committee will now show
themselves designing to be honest men in
uture, let them place this piece of theirs in
ne Journal, where it belonged, and where '