Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1860-09-21
TIE STATES NeroRNEYsH1r.

quire the utmost accuracy in the returns, w.
Upon that statement the Freeman has made
the following very extraordinary comment:
We can't, Of course, mako any direct accusations
this matter but when We rcmcmncr a sort of sueernR
paragraph which appeared boz the WWchpaH 90 che time
" MI hcurys appointment and compare with ihc
liberty which seems to be- gycn or intended 70 be given
Zoo the above those not conscientious town clerks,
ton, Why, we arc-woi' no matcri NJ " WchHdH.--
There have lecn some haltdozon differing reports"
made from different places and $50 far all thc corrected
reports which have hare bccD l tlr0r " Mr..
liraton. Now as the Hotchman figures down the ma
j0uy go two. is BE- getting suspicious that few moro
votes may he needed To- make Mr. Hcaton election ok
quasi respectable. and By its suggestions about "dar
Ing reports remind some town clerks that they can
EASILY hud mistake ~ two four or ton, for Mr. llcaton
II ISN'T any 1 Thought 90 hint 20 tho friends OF
Nr Henry that few differing reports might Dee made,
Tor u0 honest man official, will make anything but
correct return. We ohhor split tickets. and boiling re-
wllar nominations, but not half so much as tamperng
With The records of clcctous.-fTcemau.
These limitations that the Waterman has
either countonancod split tickets, or bolted
regular nominations, OF suggested false re-
turns, arc more than false and libcllous they
are superlatvoly contemplate. We will not
so far dignity them as to go into any proof to
show that every county ticket issued from this
office was the regular Republican ticket,
without split OF omission, and that the
Waterman repeatedly warned tho people a.
gainst fraudulent tickets. We only say, as
to these insinuations We can give ample
proof of their entire falsity, from the print
ing of the tickets down to the vote we de-
posted openly in the ballot-box, and in the
presence we think of the real, though not
the nominal, editor of the Freeman. The
author Of the article quoted above couiesses
that he "cannot make any direct accusations
in this natter and yet he broadly insinu-
atos what he cannot charge--what he dare
not charge--what we denounce as utterly
and UNANIMOUSLY false. The first ground for
these insnuations is "a sort Of sneering par
agraph' "at the time OF Mr.. Henry's appoint
mcnt.' We know nothing about that and
if we had known anything about it, or had ey-
en- "sneerca' on that OCCASION we should still
have felt bound to SUI port him in good faith
as the Republican candidate-and we did so
support him. The next and last ground for
these destinations is that we warned the town
clerks of a rumor Of varying reports and of
the necessity Of accurate returns The
Freeman gratuitously constructs this into
liberty which seems to be given or intend
ed to be given, to town clerks to maize f,t'sc
returHsi That is a pretty free use Of our elm
tcntions,' and quite as slandorous as free
quite as absurd as it is sanderous. None
but a villain would ever think of drawing such
"a liberty from such premises; and in the
face of our warning to the public of alledged
variations in the returns, none but profound
fool would ase such elderly" The mana
gers of the Freeman are entirely welcome to
all the credit to be got from this affair.
Now we will endeayor very frankly to ex-
plain the reason why we warned the town
clerks to make accurate returns" 1t was
simply and solely because S. s. Boyce Esq,
of the Freeman, informed us that several
town clerks had made differing returns at
different times. Boyco was our sole authori-
ty. We did not think it best to make charges
against any body, on that authority but we
did think it was wise to let the fact be known
that such a charge had been made, and to
improve it as a warning to the clerks to be
careful to give accurate returns" Boyce
knows, from our remarks to him at the time,
our estimation of such things and he ought
to have known that the use VIC made Of his
information was the best use we could make
Of it to prevent incorrect returns. One thing
more as Mr.. Boyce is the author Of the
charge duplicating the town clerks, and as be
now states circumstance which he did not
originally state to us-to wit, that the changes
in the returns have all been in favor of Mr.
Heaton-wo have right to presume that he
knows more about it than ourselves. We
call upon him to reveal what he knows. We
repeat that we did net charge false returns
upon any body, but simply recorded the fact
that there was a suspicion Of that kind and
we stated that fact that the town clerks might
. Ike care to protect themselves by accurate
retnrns.' Boyce was the author Of that sus-
picion. Now he himself has made distinct
charge. He declares that changes haze been
made IN flUor Of Mr.. Hcaton. Who made
them, sir ;-lf Boyce has any proof, Mr. Hen
ry has a right to have it, and the people of
the county have a right to have H. If he has
no proof then the town clerks have right to
have that fact confessed, and their own repu-
tation cleared. And another thing the
editor Of the Freeman Aippanty declares that
che abhors split tickets" We hope he does
We have most chariably believed that by
mistake he sent out State tickets, 0jtiout the
potes for Member Of Congress. That is "A fact
he dare not deny We hope he did not send
out split county tickets. with the name Of
Heaton inserted in place of that of the Re
publican candidate. We did NOT do that.
Somebody did. The county was fully sup
piled. Did Boyee, or the Freeman Office, help
supply them, Let the Freeman answer
/ We make no charges we only say, that the
Waterman is guiltless the fact is for the
Patriot and the Freeman TO settle among
themselves.
We beg pardon of our readers for giving 50
much space to Improbable and very unplcas-
ant matter But the attack is, we think both
the grossest and the most completely I'M
/ founded of any ever made against us. by Der-