Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1852-05-06

Under the caption OF .VinJicaiins the Truth Of His
tory" the New Albany Tribune, Of April 29th, has a
couple Of columns, intended 70 prove that when. in
recent article Of onrs, alluded to a certain Bill No
30 as the fcslf bin We mistaken. And thence
he argues, that The reasoning founded thereon falls
the ground.
In the FIRST place let us what Mr.. Gregg gains,
he makes ont his point Une argument from the premi
was, that the gratnitous charge brought By the
Journal against Messrs. Wright Owen and other class
iers, namely that they desired classify from motives
of revenge not only untrue but was from the dates
impossible because the ''calf bill" was lost after the
proposal TO classify. Suppose it not rony FOL.
lows that the charge OF the Journal and gratui
tcus it is, not by the dates proceed 10 be physical
npOssibilfy That is a great point gained indeedl We
suppose shall next be told that every charge brought
against which is not physically impossible is to
be taken as eonclusively proved Suppose man who
died some years ago accused the evidence of the
spirit rappers other equally veracious testimony
Of murders and that seek show that the ma died
week before the murder. Suppose, in this, we were
mistaken, and that he actually alive at the time
though there be not shadow of evidence going show
that he committed the deed. Is he to be charged with
the murder merely because he was alive when il occur
red! That would be principle in criminal iuris.
prudence.
II Mr.. Gregg then makes his whole case he has
not succeeded even in carrying single outwork He
must then commence his attack the fortress anew
ind whenever he does, he will find it impreenable.
But now, the identity Of the s'ca" These ami
mails sometimes exceedingly difficult TO identity
We have known many instance in which dozen or
witnesses would positively swear and no doubt
believe, a certain calf was from such COW owned by
such man; while a dozen more would swear Just as
positively, that it different calf altogether la
this case fifteen years old, the rival animals an
swer, at all events, the name The one is Calf
No. 30, Supplemental to act for general system
of Internal improvements the other Cali No % sup
Elemental to entitled act TO provide for a gen
eral system of Internal Improvement" The earmarks
correspond Both calves evidently belong to the sans
breed. Mr. Gregg claims that his calf is the "caf;',
the real Simon Pure. We believe We shall have to con
cede the right of prmogeniure bat that old fea
ture Of arstOcrac system has been abolished among
as to human beings, and we know reason why il
should be retained calves.
The breed Of these creatures TO be numerous
Mr. Gregg mentions others besides his favorite No
%: one introduced by Col James, January I3 and one
by Mr. Owen, January 16 Their name III would seem
is legion. Among many competitors we despair
establishing the claims of the animal of preference
And the decision if at this distance of time it
could be made leads nothing and We are not sure
bat that Mr.. Gregg knows about calves than we
do pursue the discussion further; and Rr Gregg
may, if it crafty him, select whichever individual
whether bull heifer he finally decides to prefer and
establish and place record his pedigree the neal
and legitimate descendant Of the celebrated imam.
moth"
He will then have right to assert that the man ac
cused Of murder alive the time the murder was
committed. But advise him gather few more
items Of evidence, before he "goes before the country
in the trial of this case.
In all seriousness, if Mr. Gregg desires argue
collateral and immaterial issues bat the main
question ITSELF let him answer two questions.
First. Did did not, Mr.. Wright introduce, and
did or did not Messrs Wright, Owen, Eggeston Zenor
and the other classifers for during the session Of
1867, bill ''to classify the public worksg'
Second. II such proposal had succeeded, would it,
would it not, have saved the State of Indiana mil
lions of dollars, to pay the which she is
grievOusly taxedi
We do not think, that Mr.. Gregg's assurance
will venture to reply in the negative to either Of these
questions. II he answers them affirmatvely, then be
admits that Mr. Wright introduced and that these gen
tenen voted for, bill which would have saved rs from
the population that threatened u.s. and from the
burdens that are now pressing on shoulders.
And Mr. Gregg unable to deny this, seeks esade
its force BY saying, that good thing introduced
from bad motive in other words, if he endorses the
Journals charge that these gentlemen advocated class
fcaton merely to CRAFTY their feelings Of revenge
against The system men," let him and
prove so seroas an accusation
We that the allegation is utterly untrue And
defy either the Journal the Tribune, bring up
the first particle Of evidence to the contrary.