Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1843-07-11
The T'icctiC E.cerirg EcstsrS OF tIse 'E're;i
suscr CT STATE.


The RushrBe Uhig of June 3c,h Is in a terrible pickle
about the elcctioneeng letter the Treasurer Of Stale
repeatedly published 10y II positively
that the letter Wing Gentleman that VII
lage BY Mr.. DUN. the Treasurer Of State But how
does this assertion tally with the positive Suqon of
the Indiana journal that the letter stolen from
The mail, By the Wing mail robber, at Cambridge City ,
There is certainly lie between the Journal aud the
Nashville Wing, else there must have been than
i-..~r If The character
Before saving another word, however, we will copy.
or The amusement Of our readers the following from the
Wing, the subject The circulation of that paper be-
ing limited they might otherwise fail to Here it
is read and laugh
." 1t many Of our readers that fo several
weeks past the editors # the Indiana state Sentinel hive
been exciting over the pubcaiion # riv ate letter charged
u have cen written iy George III Dunn to political friend
regard 10 private nattcTma'tcS with which the public
had business whatever; hut how IT g into their
sion, until recently remained profound secret far the
public are concerned as wei a mystery. The name Of
the inliv 'ual 10 whom 1t had b'ca directed, well his
pqce u residence withheld from the people in the pub
lcatI TO which we nave alined he as aus upon Mr.
D. were of the grosSes character and attempted d.
injustice. 50 dark ard secretly had The act been PER
reated and traces commission could be gath
cred from the publication Of the Sentinel that the editor
Indiana State journal led believe the letter had
been pufloned fir m the mail, by heareSs villain T. aid
the cause of Whlcomb and Van Buleul>m in Indiana Re-
developments have satisfied mind that the journal
mistaken in its conclusions; yet sorry say
possession e The letter obtained ~ less rdnous
BY This We d. not wh ~ he understood rs chag
ing Of Sentinel with any improper conduct
further than tie u>abe which they made OF the
letter, a II had Keen ImpTe AMI dtbOuOr1by put
their possession.
are satisfied that the individual
in this cNn, old and ardent f lend Of MI Dunn and be-
sent 10 our readers which viii l,trn stigma nlelby
upon some politician or politicians Of tbs town. which
never he 81 ken oil II hard ti-g To conceal crime
9" murder VIII out, Immediately after the publication Of
the eter, the gentleman 70 whom had been sent, and
whose property called the Sentinel On
ing 1t. told him that without doubt, the letter
Whi he had cohfdentrYg showed lie astonishel
The eer appeared 10 be the yet he could not divine
how had from his posses. ION. He Of the I'M
preston that il al ms house ds'rOyed search was
n de for It, however. without
We had suspicion OF the which third
person had obtained tie letter om ccgms which
we shall not anne. AID informed friend At
time. But the matter has been made Ilain Ia hs
speech az New Salem, MI Smith stated, tat he hsd been
informed thai George II. Dunn had been writing tbs
county Lin- the Ioope not 20 De caught n0pPng
they were ia 1899 lie di not state that he had seen such
letter in he Sentinel ni if he had H. tie pu!ic ton
did not disclose the IA / rhere the ietes pu' hed
paper hal teen sent he went commenting upon This
point and stated that he thought the people very wide
awake on that occasion hIs oocur ~ &c 18Th instant
Thursday u tie week, Jesse d. Bright addressed
portion # the citizens OF tins town. the Count House.
Nj Smhs sta ement satisfied beyond the shadow Of
doubt, who had furnished he letter the Chaf mans IL
had been Obtained and Of It, identity. Bur Mr 3 lut the
matter cst by fun but nnguaried admission f The
pamphlets he alluded to that Of M Smith and said he SUP
posed had teeu heard of te1re " II the same one
he stated about which tain letter hal teen
tins place, which lost ard got up the printers and
published - Mr. Bright had been inst ucted on
tins ~utj ec lie had been - tie f4ots ehc here al
and or-oi whee when be the de-
claiaii9n We noticed charse IL counter nee IN
moment. and perceived riacig Ia PARTICULAR quarter
Ihei here aie the iacS The letter either punined
from its fefOniOusig taken hi yals
Picked W IN the street II does make ne particle
difference by which Il these methods II was ohta ned
he nfamy, the depavy the uIptuie Of offence
directed 10 person with whom he Is acquainted either
ealfd nseaed, what his duty return the leer
70 him. UNREAD Has he right u appropriate contents
% has own use Suppose contains money has the finder
Isht TO his use AMI seorcte the letter
has legal right read The another ind
'iduai, without his permission. The party whom letter
sent has legal property IT, and ti.ht
o examine ~ contents. or 10 apFTop late them
lse than he would TO fe your pocket your trunk n your
adde bag of theirs
Yet some one for paltry political purposes only reads
pirate letter which had beer lost Mr. Bright alleged,
ut SecrefeS II om rs and SENDS 1t stranger 90 De
sed for most accused object"
After all this ,aporing. 'rather guess that those
Wings in this county, who have pretended 10 believe
)unns letter sham forgery Of notwithstanding
he ourna unequlvocaIly admitted lis genunencss, will
gin to think that there reafity about u.
But what there for tins great display of pro-
indignation The part Of the Wing aud all the
ditcrs ,sk about 'moral and r,i'gous obligation One