The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994, 1858-09-08
The Herald gets up another
Swill Milk Article-It Re-
peats it's Old Story.

peats It's Old Story.
The last Herald contains poor pitifu!
defence against the charge which we made
and proved upon it. Such defense is,
to those who have read both papers, tant.
amount to plea of guilty. The object
of it seems to have been to humbug some
of those who read only that paper into the
belief that it had made point against US.
1t is q poor "swill milk" effort that excites
no emotion but pity.
The editor tries to escape from the tes-
timony Of Mr.. HOLIDAY by saying that
the State Auditor has INSTRUCTED the Aud
itor to make out two sets of duplicates.
Now Mr.. Herald, suppose that to be true,
and what under the heayens has it to do
with the controversy? The Auditor of
State is black Republican of the Know
Nothing stripe, and if be is to be defend
ed for issuing illegal orders it is not
for us to do it. We said at first what we
still say-that there is no authority in the
law for making another full set of dupli-
Gates, and that it was so repeatedly an
nounced by both Republicans and Demo-
Gratis when the law was on its passage
Having in this manner disposed of the
testimony of Mr.. Holiday, the Herald
gives bungled up repetition of what has
been said before in regard to Mr.. Koehler
to dispose of his testimony. 1t then dis
poses of Mr.. Archbold in its characteris-
tic style-by suppressing the main point
and quibbIing about something of less
Importance. The Herald quotes what
Mr.. Archbold says about mot recollect-
ing' &c. and says that is no denial of
its statements. To those who have read
only the Herald's articles, this might
seem satisfactory; but every one who has
read both sides cannot fail to see that it
is weak and pitiful lodging of the is
sue. The Herald said that q democratic
lawyer had made a calculation of the ad-
ditional cost &C., and said that Mr..
Archbold was the lawyer referred to-
Mr.. Arehbold says in his letter, without
any qualification, that he never made a
calculation and consequently never told
the editor of the Herald that he had made
one But the honest editor entirely over
looks this and quibbles about Mr. Arch.
bold not recollecting something else.
1t is useless to waste much time con.
troverting matter with an editor who
will misrepresent whenever it suits his
purpose; who will in giving testimony
suppress oil that could initiate against
him and overstate all that would be FOL
him; who will shut his eyes to the main
points oe case and try to divert atten.
tion by quibbling about triaes. We have
sustained our charges against him by over
whelming testimony, and he has not been
able even to weaken them by explanation
We proved them by Mr.. HOLIDAY.
We proved them by Mr.. KGHLER.
We proved them by Mr.. ARcHBoLD.
We proved them by Mr. HILL, and
We proved them by the Herald itself.
We will not follow the editor through
his jumbled fix ups. They ore merely his
former articles chewed over. Of all his
weak things this last is the weakest. He
tries to drag in outside matters to hide
himself under and conceal his defeat. We
have not the heart to say of his articles
what they deserve; we wont kick man
when he is down. His winnings about
an attempt to crush him, and his vain
strugglings to rid himself of the charges
we fixed upon him has excited our sym.
pathy. He announces in his last thai
the controversy is ended: no doubt he
wishes to the bottom of his soul that il
had never begun. Well, Mr.. Herald, il
will be ended just when you quit misrepre.
senting it aud not before.