White Cloud Kansas chief. [volume] (White Cloud, Kan.) 1857-1872, 1858-01-21

CoRREcuoE.-Mr. Redpsth claims that
we have done him injustice, in some
statements regarding the part he acted in
the Lawrence Convention, and in the
County Convention, at Troy. Not wish
ing to do any man injustice. we will
give him the benefit of correction. He
says that himself, Phillips, Conway, and
Others. did not Oppose The nomination Of
State ticket, but favored It to the last !;
and that those who opposed the nomina-
ton of ticket, were those who 4dsoca-
ted voting in October. That be did not
dictate to the Troy Convention, but was
for abiding by the decision of the Law
renee Convention. That he was not sp-
pointed on Committee to memorabilia
Congress for the acceptance of the Tope-
ka Constitution, but for the rejection of
the Lecompton swindle. And that he
did not circulate ISLANDERS upon Free State
men, who favored voting in October 3
In our issue Of week before last, we
corrected the statement in regard to his
position on the question of nominating a
ticket. From what he told us personal
ly, we were satisfied that he acted for the
best. In regard 10 memorializing Con-
gress, we find, upon examination, that
his statement is correct. When we wrote
the article in question, we had given a
hasty perusal of slip containing con-
densed report Of the proceedings of the
Lawrence Convention, which was then
taken away, and it was our impression
that the Topeka Constitution was to be
the subject of the memorial to Congress.
That slip did not say who had favored or
opposed the nomination Of State ticket.
1t stated that the project was voted down,
and conveyed the inference that i: was by
an almost unanimous vote. Then, we
saw that this Convention, which had thus
decided against voting, had appointed an
important Committee, the leading mem
bers of which, were those who had oppo-
sed voting in October. With no other
information on the subject, what else
would suggest itself to any one, than that
these were the men who had again oppo-
sed voting? And when we heard that
Mr.. Redpath had been an active member
of the Troy Convention, which succumb-
ed to the decision of the Lawrence Con-
vention, our belief that he was one of the
leading opponents Of the voting policy,
was strengthened.
Having cleared up the foregoing mat
tiers, we now come upon the subject Of
slandering Free State men who favored
voting in October-and this does not
look quite SO clear. Subsequent to the
decision of the Grasshopper Falls Con-
vention, and previous to the October
election, the Kansas correspondence of
the st. Louis Democrat, New York Tri-
bune, Chicago Tribune, and other papers,
abounded in slurs and inSinuations upon
Free State men, which, if not downright
SANDERS amounted to the same thing.
1t was said, among other things, that
but few votes would be cast by Free State
men, and it was intimatcd that they had
been bought by the Pro-Slavery party,
to vote, and thereby make it appear that
the Free State party recognized the acts
of the Pro-Slavery Legislature. This,
and many other hard things. were said of
Free State men, who would scorn even
to think of being bribed. Mr.. Redpath
was known throughout the entire coun-
try, as the Kansas correspondent of the
st. Louis Democrat, and Mr.. Phillips,
as that Of the New York Tribune. The
Kansas correspondence of these papers
contained the insinuations alluded to !;
and if Redpath and Phillips did not write
them, somebody else did it upon their
credit.