Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1852-04-15
LFor ths BANS Inalana Sac ssntIneI.l
A Correction.

Mr.. EDIToR:-When ceased to be one OF the Edit-
ors Of the State Sentinel determined that would pay
no attention to any personal assault which might be
made upon my past editorial career. have adhered TO
that determination heretofore and have regarded IN ST.
lence sundry suggestions and statements, which
have appeared in certain newspapers tending, uusty
to my disparagement. mean to adhere to tins rule,
Tor II my active career as an editor VIII not speak LOT
itself, il would be useless multiply words about IT.
But there be occasional exceptions TO all general
rules, and have occurred 10 this Of mine, which
beg your permission to aude to.
The first grew out OF debate in the State Senate,
last winter, (while absent Ohio) upon the sub
iect of certain Mexican trophies" in the State Ii
brary An old resolution, passed by the Central Demo-
cratic Club, before the nomination oil Mr. Polk was re-
ierred to- and false construction put upon it. Ii was
characterized hostile the annexation OF Texas and
its authorship attributed 10 me- learned from
number Of the State Journal which in Ohio. This
SANDER had been often repeated and so often reuted
before that had thought would hardly be revived
again | certainly should not now speak OF it, had 1t
not appeared that prominent member OF the Demo-
cratic party In the Senate thought u expedent to take
for granted the slanderous construction OF the resolution
Justify himself in disparaang me- and the other
members of the very effective political club which adop
ted the resolution. desire only to repeat what
have heretofore said editor OF the State Sentinel that
the resolution in question contemplated in any
manner, hostility to the annexation Of Texas, but did
express hostility to the dissolution Of the Unon and it
expressed nothing AIRY who says 1t does, is,
in my opinion, incapable OF constituting good English
The resolution aimed at the dissolution speeches
which, the previous session of the U s. Senate had
been made by Mr. McDuiiie and at the apparent dsso-
luton tendencies them before, (and aiierwards) mani
tested by Calhoun and Gen. Hsmiton, well by Me-
Daflie and others All the results which followed,
proved that the resolution founded truth; but
thanks to the good OF the OF the people OF
the South well of the North the designs Of those
eaders paralyzed in time; but not so not
to demonstrate all intelligent men the soundness Of
the resolution in question.
The second incident Of which ] desire to speak,
ens in the leading article Of the State Journal of the ID
instant, under the head OF Gov. Weights Platform"
Ii therein said among other things not necessary to
my present purpose notice that the arrangement
Of the State debt under the provisions Of the Butler Bill
was not a Democratic measure. The Messrs.
CHAPMANs were then the Editors Of the State Sentinel,
nd ,cere opposed TO It,"
In reference tins asl sentence spea! Of my late
brother and of myself So far from truth is the
assertion that opposed TO the adjustment of the
State Debt what is called tie Butler basisso far
rom the truth it, claim 10 hare been hrs person loO
made the first suggestion Of such settlement print
should have made the suggestion year or Two sooner
than it made had not been deere,lby tie dolbts
expressed 10y politicians who feared inaryto themselves
because they Thought the peopls were not prepared for
such In proof Of first statement refer
the Editor Of the Journal 10 the flies Of the State Senti-
nel of February, 1915, and subsequently, during the
peGdency Of the Butler Bill the Legislative session of
he following year. Ii any one suggested snch an adj
ustment of the State Debt in print soaas than Feb
mary, 1915, should like he ecideace Of it. II
vas, as have said then. not idea with
mad thought oil the matter more than year. perhaps
nearly two years. and during that time had suggested
he scheme to many leading from different quarters
If the State, in conversation. Not ected to its
IeSirGbiiity, though many doubted its feasibility This
being the case, took the first favorable opportunity
which offered itself to publish the proposition The
suit is well known.
know that certain interested parties during the pen
lency of the Butler propositions the session of 1916
D. supposed that the Editors of the State Sentinel
wanting in zeal in their behalf Mr. Derees will reeolect
that Mr. Butler made several distinct propositions the
last Of which of course favorable the State
md came nearest to the ideas originally entertained
1t so happened that knew what Mr.. Butler was au-
lhorized to do; and with other views but the best
interest of the State, and for the reputation of my party
Indiridual, did something towards defeating the
first propositions in order bring the last and best
knew that this would subject misapprehensions
at the time, perhaps injury afterwards but though
the Journal hints in regard to others, might have
made money by pursuing different course chose to
do what considered my honest duty my party and
The people of the State and have for moment
felt that did wrong.
As TO the party character Of the measure, if it had
been unfortunate unsuccessful the Democratic party
would have been held responsibilities the paternity of the
theirs it is logical that they should claim
the credit oil the measure being successful and Fortunate
Respectfully yours,
j. P. CHAPMAN