The Hancock Jeffersonian. [volume] (Findlay, Ohio) 1857-1870, 1859-03-18
Rather sharp prsotice.

1
| -(Hsncock Jefefsonisn.
"Yout assertion Is TOO broad to cove
the grounds with truth, Mr.. Jefersoniap. =
The Editor Of the JefIersonisn has way b
which be attempts to get his friends out o
tight places. thstsavors much ofimpuden nee
to ssy the least Of II. by simply denyinl
|ststements made. "--l Hancock Courier.
Yes, and the assurance, not to say
anything OF the "impudence," with
which the Editor Of the Courier pa
rades himself before the public, after
rnutilating the extr.ct we made from
the Courier, 40 as TO hide his own
egregions blundering, is most re
The extract we made from the
Courier, and which appeared just as
found in that paper, reads as follows:
"Las. winter Mott, Harlan. Stanton,
rompkins, Wade, Bingham, and Giddinss.
Black Republican members Of Congress,
voted to admit Kansas into the Union as u
slave StHtc; UuI tb,y .rs orpsoed ~, aud
voted against the admission OF Oregon into
the Union, few days ago, as a FRrE state.
Comment 10 unnecessary"
--lHsncock Courier.
But this we'll posted Editor, find.
ing that he had blundered - that he
could not sustain his charges, under.
takes to "smcnd his pleadings," by
striking out the clause "last winter"
from the extract we gave, and giving
it as it appears at the head Of this ar
ticle. The Editor once relieved from
this troublesome clause, travels back
some three years, and rakes up the
action Of the Republicans on the
Dunn bill, aud then winds up by
growing as flippantly as any super
animated "biddy" that had gone in.
to her dotage.
T"ts attempted evasion is yer,
much like getting quito the "frying'
pan into the fire )" and we would
suggest that the gentleman should
have further "amended," by striking
out the name Of Tompkins; for, as il
happens, the Dunn bill was acted
upon in the spring Of 1855, and
Tompkins was not elected to Con.
yress until the fall of 1857.
This sharp (D Editor, however,
In his researches, it seems from bis
article, failed to find the names Of
Mott, 2omphins, and "others," re.
corded in favor of Dunn's bill, and
therefore dispatches a food Of light
through the following lucid para
graph in his article:
"Amons the Republicans in Congress who
voted TO admit Kansas as q slave state, and
place the Fugitive Slave Law over that ter
ritory under Dunn's bill. we find the names
Of HARLAN, STANTON, WADE, and
GlDDlNGS. The reason, probably, that
Mott and others named, did no; do so. they
we're not there to vote, for with a single ex-
,eption, every Republican member Of the
House Of Representatives voted Tor Dunn's
'lavery BILL"
Having started out with Mott,
Harlan, Stanton, Tompkins, Wade,
and Giddings, in Aaring
read lines, charging that they had
,cted to admit Kansas az q slave
tate, he suddenly falls "tbree cats"
" backing down on Harlan, Stan
on. Wade, and Glddings; aud, after
that Mott and others did
ot vote for the bill, winds up by
aging that "witha single exception.
to Letter, Of Ohio) every
republican member oithe House OF
representatives voted for Dunn's
lavery bill"
Summing up the Editors state.
lents, we have them as follows:-I
lott, Harlan. Stanton, Tompkins,
'ingham, and Giddings, members
the uouse of Representatives,
oted Tor Dunn's bill-Leiter alone
oted against the bill. Mott, Bing-
am, and 'Tompkins were absent,
nd therefore did not vote for the
i'll. Every Republican member oil
ne House oi Representatives, with
ne exception, voted for Dunn's bill.
Ii our Cou' Ter neighbor has not
reduced q muddy enough article
his time, for all practical purposes,
We are certainly no judge.
What a most brilliant luminary
hedding, as he docs, such q pro-
usion of light, to enliehten tho dark
ecesses Of the political lsraell--
rather, what an oracle, uttering
With such unerring certainty, even
he hidden things oi fate."
Report OF the Breslin Investigating