The daily clarion. [volume] (Meridian, Miss.) 1863-1866, 1864-06-17
From The hlssiasipphn,l
The Clarion and T. G. Lyon.


Owing to temporary absence, we had
not noticed the Clarion's reply to the
"strange article" admitted into our col
umns some days ago deprecating the
spirit OF persecution evineed towards
Theodoric 9. Lyon. There is very little,
however, in this reply OF the Clarion
which justifies rejoinder, and our read,
ers need not fear that we intend TO infiot
upon them another two columns upon
this occasion.
In reference to our statement that
Lyon was cashiercd on account of the
letter published in the Republic. tho
Clarion asserts that "he was rot cashier.
ed and conscribed f~r writing that arti.
che, as the finding gofthe court will prove"
lfthc Clarion is right IN this uneoniyocot
assertion, then we lave been wrongly in
formed. We were led to make the state.
ment from the late letter OF Lyon addres.
sed to the Mobile News, and other papers
that this was his offense, from the plain
repitition of the same thing in the reso-
lnlions ofthe 18th Mississippi regiment,
that he was cashiertd for publishing an
article 'alleged to, contain disloyal doc.
trines," and from the unqualified state,
ments OF persons whose reputation for
veracity is equal to the Clarion, or any
body else.
Thus it will be seen that no "practicle
joke" was played off upon us in This in
stance. II the Clarion's assertion is right,
it is quite an easy matter to be proven,
for we presume that the writer of the at-,
ticle in which it is found can obtain free
access to the sentence of the court. II
the sentence Of the court shows that ha
was cashiered for some other crime, let
it be published, and the question will be
settled Until this is done, the Clarion
will excuse us and the public for not
believing lis statement. For oar part,
it is the first time we have ever
heard he was cashiered for anything else.
1t is true, as we have been informed,
that other charges were preferred. but
they failed to be sustained, and Lyon
was cashiered for the sole cflense of
writing and publishing the letter. If
this is not true, the Clarion has the
power TO correct general false impres.
Sion and to clear its own skirts. If it
fails to do this, then it must accept the
other alternative.
We see it now stated in the Clarion
that the quandam editor OF the hepubhc
admitted Lyons card as an 'advertis.
ment." and with "the express knowled-
GO that the doctrine would be denounc1
ed in the next issue of his paper"
Stran ge that the public should be so egro-
giously imposed upon by the Republicl
All the readers of that unhappy article
will remmember that it appeared not in
the usual shape ofan advertisement, and
whatever may have been the sex
press knowledge between the author
and the publisher as to the forthcoming
il is well known there was
no word or letter to show that there was
any such ''exrress knowledge" between
the said publisher and the public.
The case as it now stands is worse than
it was before. BY the showing of the
Clarion, the quondam editor OF the Re
public admitted political article into his
columns whose doctrines he disapproved.
md compounded with the author for
certain compensation TO admit il without
any mark of disapprobation, with the
express knowledge" that his denuncia-
lion should be delayed week, thus Civ
ing the letter one entire week to do its
before the antidote was applied.
The poor gullible public in the mean
me, were denied any express knowled
ge" of the editors sentiments. 1t will be
that the brief comment
which proceeded the letter of Lyon stat
ed that its admission was claimed as
matter of justice, and that the views of
the editor would be given next week.
Would it have required any more space
or time to have said the doctrine con.
tanned in the letter was disapproved in
stead of leaving the public in the dark as
to this important feature? We arc not
going TO insinuate that the editor wanted
10 see how the thing took, before he pre-
,ented his views. We take him by his
own preseE tatian of his case, and accord
ng 10 this there was an express knowl
edge" that his denunciation should DO
delayed a week.
One point more and We arc done for
he present, we hope forever, with the
subject. The Clarion takes mirage at Il
,emark Of ours which says "The actiCn Of
he Republic week or two after the trial
md conviction Of Lyon, in joining in the
lot cry against him." etc. and chsrac-
eriz it as a ''gratuitous SANDER" IL ia
claimed that the article deDouncing
lyon came out in the next issue as in
ended This is doubtless true. Certain.
y we have no disposition to colitroyert it.
/ is very immaterial. AS soon as the
.amor arose the Republic joined in il.
But latter the frial and conviction OF I.y-
IN" did not the Republic present the ap.
,earance Of exulting in his misiorluntg
Iet the files Of that paper answer. This
vas our "gratuitous SANDER" Now wo
re told by the article under considera.
ion, and we presume its author TO be
zone other than the quanda'm editor Of
he Republic, that Lyon was never blam-
VI by him for writing thar fatal letter
hat older heads were deeper in the miro
han he was in the mud, and that it vas
lot treasonable, but unfortunate, untime-
Y, uncalled for, etc; WELL il seems that We
gree upon the main points, and we trust
hat there will be no occasion for further
ontroyersy.
p@- A Cairo dispaih, OF the 10th inst,
ays:
w. Laner, the murderer OF Colonel
)sborn, Of the 3l,t Illinois regiment. wHs