The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1850-09-07
A Question of Veracity.

for Governor addressed meeting in Elk
ton. On the Saturday following we al
luded to his speech in The VINO, ia
which we stated that he asserted that Mr..
Clarke was the candidate of a clique in
the wing party, and charged him with beng
iRs;ncere on the subject Of Reform. Our
remarks were copied into various wing
papers in the state and the assertions OF
Mr.. Lowe above given were made the
matter of comment in the Baltimore Pa
tr,ot on the 18th Of August. Mr.. Lowe
published reply to the article Of the Pa
triot, In the Baltimore Argus, on the 14lh
or 18th of August, and on the 10th his
letter appeared in the Baltimore Sun. AT
that time and since, till within a few days
we were confined to our bed by sickness
the papers were preserved by friend
and handed to US. We mention this, to
show why We have not sooner referred to
the matter.
In Mr.. loves letter we find the follow
ing sentences:
81 am said to have styled him, [Mr.
Clarke,] the Baltimore Courthouse
clique candidate, (tor such is the evident
construction to be placed upon that por-
ton of the article referred to,) and such
is the current rumor. 1t is positively
iaIss." at is likewise said
that called in question Mr.. Clarke's SIN
cerity Shy the reckless assertion that when
he voted for the bill to call Convention
to reform the Constitution, lat the last
spssion,) he was still opposed to the OBJ
iect OF the bill! In other words that
8 impugned the veracity Of my opponent.
Il made no such ISSUE"
Surprising that the Patriot might have
been led to found what it said upon our
statement, and there being direct issue
between US and Mr.. Lowe on the subject,
we again take up the matter.
Fist, then: Mr.. Lowe eats his ,cords
and states what is false, and what he knew
TO be false, when he says he did not style
Mr.. Clarke the candidate OF clique. He
asserted in his speech in this place that
Mr.. c. was not the candidate OF the mass
OF the wing party, but that he was the
candidate OF an ar,stecratic wing Of that
party which controlled the nominations,
and he named as among them Messrs.
johnson, Richardson and Pratt. He press
ed this matter upon his hearers to con.
vince them that Mr.. Clarke was a clique
candidate, as is remembered by gentlemen
Of both parties
Again: when Mr.. Lowe denies that he
called in question Mr. Clarke's sincerity
on the subject Of Reform, he retracis what
he here asserted and uiters It jaiyehood. He;
did say that he was opposed 10 Reform IN
til he was fixed upon by the "ruling jun
to" as The Wing candidate, and that then
knowing opposition to Reform vas unpop-
ular, he voted for the Reform Bill. Does
not that question Mr.. Clarke's sincerity
II will be remembered that he pressed
these things also upon hrs audience. But
IN the presence Of Mr.. Clarke and in his
letter he sWallo'c, his words again, and thus
acknowledges that bis charges wer. un-
founded.
Here we will take the liberty TO quote
from The Cecil Democrat, the organ of
Mr.. loves party in this county. in
giving statement Of Mr. loves speech
it says:
"Mr. Lowe desired to know, at what |
precise period, and by what process Of
reasoning or augmentation by day, or Of
dreams by night, he became convert TO
reform? There was no evidence OF it, up
10 the very time when he was fixed upon
by the ruling junto as their candidate for
the Executive chair. Paul, when con-
verted, fell to the ground, and light
shone around HIM; but no such phenome-
ma attested the genuineness Of Mr.. Clarke's !
conversion TO reform.
The generally received opinion that
Mr.. Clarke owed his nomination to the
clique which have ruled the Wing party
Of Maryland for the last twenty years.
whose feelings and interests are opposed
10 the changes demanded by the people
Of the State, was adduced as strong pre-
sumptive evidence that he is not Re-
former"
Now in that quotation we have the
proof that Mr.. Lowe asserted that Mr..
Clarke was the candidate Of "ruling jun
to- and that he "questiosed his sincerity"