The miners' express. (Dubuque, Iowa) 1849-1854, 1850-03-06
Mr.. Van Hagan's Defencc before tho Tax
Payers OF Dubuque County.

We publish below another effusion from tn,
Office of the Treasurer of Dubuque County, ant
ask for it the attentive perusal of those who arr
DESTROYS of knowing what becomes of the Taxes
they pay, and who, like ourselves, are an1iou!
to see the obscurity which hangs about the Fl
nancial affairs of our county, in some measure
cleared away. IL. y s..as..s IT,.
| The article is couched in very offensive Ian
guage, and abounds in personal abuse and sour
rility of the lowest kind; and were it addressed
to any other person than ourself, should not fine
place in our columns:-but as the writer has had
the impotence to ask us to publish it, and as we
are DESTROYS our readers should know all that he
has to say for himself, we print it, assuring him
that unless he brings forward something more
to the point than he has, he must find some 9TH
er medium of publication in future. He says as
follows: -,..s.,' III a-.s
DUBUQUE, Feb. %, 1850.
! Doctor Holt, Editor of the Express: So
1t was out of respect to the public, and re-
gard for my own reputation, that sent you the
communication published in your last paper l
had not then, have not now any hope of car
rylng any conviction to your mind fthe charac-
ter OF your ungenerous attack upon me. Had
been ever so willing to have entertained such a
hope, your preface to my communication would
have dispelled it. 1t is painful to have the fear
confirmed, that there are minds in which no
sense of reciprocal justice can be found-minds
so Inflated with the greatness of themselves,
that they can see no right anywhere else. Such
appears to be the product of Shenandoah in your
case, You sit upon your tripod and write, print,
an oh &C. a.,
gravest character, without any regard to the
rights of others, and without any regard to truth,
and call all this "asking for information as you
had right to do" You charge and insinuate
without word of authority, and want another
to defend himself by "facts and igures;' and
when, if he asks what you mean, and on what
you found your charges aud dark insinuations,
you call it 'artful dodgng.' Facts and figures
are certainly, to some extent, accessible to you,
as all the records are public documents. Why
could you not then furnish something like a
"fact and figure basis for your article? The
truth is, you dare not attempt any such proof;
you know it would be against you; and it is far
more congenial to the Incidence and lttlcness of
your habits and disposition to set in your office
and write contemplate falsehood, than to spend
five minutes of labor to ascertain truth You
are the aggressor, and should make out your
case by some fair show. Have you done so?-
What have you furnished to show that have
not, from time to time, faithfully accounted for
all monies received by me to the proper officer
Where are your "facts and fgures:' Against
what am l to produce my ''facts and igures?''
10 meet your insnuations? How quick and how
often would you change them! No, no, Doctor,
none of your dodging-giving the "figures,
and az, the ''facts' too; and you will find me at
all times ready. Give me your position, come
out from your coverts, and will meet you fair
ly before the public in this matter. Ifyou can
not do it, justice requires you should drop your
contemplate course ofinsinuations and charges.
But this your editorial management and reputa-
ton in the art of prcferring charges indicate you
can scarcely be expected to listen to, while that
great I'' dwells in your cabbage head You
ask whether meet the objection "charged'' in
your article against whom may be guilty? Ger
tainly | do, by asking you for some, at least a
shadow of proof, that your objections are found
cd on "facts' or Figures Will you say that
able position, truly-a locomotive volume of
truth-an Editor, whose simple say-so is an OBJ
lection to be met by ''facts' and "fgures, and
is a perfect substitute for all evidence Truly,
Was not aware we had so valuable an importa-
ton from the valley of Shenandoah. But you
DO speak OF a deficiency in the books of the Au-
dtor of State in 194S, and instructions having
been given to the proper officer to prosecute me-
l.. A. Thomas, Esq, was the proper officer to
have received such instructions Now, let me
ask you, did not MIR. Thomas inform you, in nv
presence, in your office, not many days since,
(tetore and since you wrote this preface,) that
the whole charge was wholly incorrect; that he
had never received any such instructions This
Mr.. Thomas has fully authorized me to assert.
Now why, let me ask you with all candor-why
in the face of such an assertion, do you embrace
such an item in your justification? You may
think this "artful dodging;'' it looks to me like
utterlng not only knowingly, but maliciously,
wiltul falsehood. You allude to the offices |
hold-perhaps you may want one of then. How
do hold them? By election of the people, and
to my own business.
Now, see here: suppose, for the sake of ssinfor-
nation and enquiry as ''you have right to
do you give us three sheet manuscript edito-
rial, "making enquiry what effect your sschar-
ges and dark ''insinuations' have produced.
and learn how many minds you have embttered
and how tar you have succeeded in your object
Is that reason why you should exercise your
malice towards me? You say, if feel the full
force of the objections "charged" against my Of
clal conduct, why do | writhe and squirm thro'
six pages of manuscript to dodge the point at is
sue? The truth is, Dr., did feel the full force
of your oGjections-but the full force was not
what your inflated vanity led you to think it was.
labored through six pages of manuscript, not
to meet your objections, for they were founded
on nothing; nor to dodge the point at issue, for
there was no issue on facts; but to encompass
the immense rotundity of your sef.estimate, and
see if there was lett single point accessible to
honorable impulse; but l found none, and so I
must say labored in vain. In the balance of
your shayut preface, you repeat many insinua-
ting questions, and throw out many rery ngen-
ious surmises, the only difficulty is, you have
so many ''ifs.' Now, where you have ssfacts
and figures to deal in, why use "ifs'" You
talk about your right of "enqury' have no
objection to it. But do you call your first edi-
torial and second preface an enquirye o shame!
where Is thy blush! At any time you can oyer
come your disposition to locality so far as to call
at my office, you shall have full and free access
to "facts and figures so far at least as am
concerned. But you say, you will not be confn-
ed, in defence of your position, to my records
you have not appealed, you say, to what was on
the records, but to what aras cot. That is, !
conclude, you appeal from the record, and will,
your usual good sense, appeal to ''wide and
vague conjecture or some "notorious facts
to defend your position. This is what / sup
pose, and what every man must have perceived,
and you need not have SO plainly stated your ba-
sis of defence. But perhaps the truth opposed
your tender conscience, and it must out. On
IL 81 Il 4