The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1866-04-12
Dir. Newell Again.

We take pleasure IN publishing the fol.
owing letter from our Assemblyman, Hon.
,. Newell, exculpating himself in meas:
ire from our structures of week OF two
,ince. in reference to his course on some To-
cal bills appertaining especially to the IN
terest of his constituents. We should GER
talnly be happy to have Mr.. Newell exoner-
ate himself from all blame in the matter for
we have none but the friend!iest feelings to-
wards him personally. 1t was only his ap-
parent opposition to perfectly proper bill
in which many Of our citizens were deeply
that we animadverted upon
And we still think the objections he urged
to the bill were utterly groundless, A
Church School, of course would be a Church
School no longer, if Presbyterians, Metho-
dists, Baptists, Uniyersalists, or intidels,
NAV be elected its trustees and control its
1t was on the express con-
dition that it was to be for all time an Epls-
copal Church School, that the capital was
raised to put it into operation, and it is es-
pecially on that ground, that the FUNDS are
to be raised for its permanent endowment
We are glad to see that Mr.. Newell has
introduced in the Assembly another bill to
amend the act to incorporate the Kenosha
Female Seminary, similar in all respects to
the bill passed by the Senate and killed in
the Assembly by indefinite postponement.
The following is Mr.. Newelrs letter;
ASSEMBLY CHAMBER, April 2 '66.
Editor Telegraph:
DEAR Sir noticed your criticism or
my conduct as Legislator, especially III re
gard to certain bills. In this criticism yor
have very essentially mis- stated the facts IL
the case. l have delayed answering to YOU
statements till now, in consequence of al
intination of Senator Sholes, who believed
that after you had read his statement you
would fully exhonerate me in the matter.
In your remarks March 29th, you do re
tract little, but say ''your structures were
mild compared with those made by the
friends and patrons of the Seminary"
do not know what may have been said by
the friends and patrons of the Seminary, bu
believe it the duty of an Editor of a pub
lie journal to be better informed before HI
criticizes the action of public men.
The facts in the case are these, My at
tention was called to the provisions Of thu
Seminary bill, sometime since. Probably
when printed and laid on my desk, STATED
my objections to the bill to Senator Sholes
not on account of its reference to the Epis
copaI Church, or, as you say, ''his opposi
ton was based entirely upon the facetiou'
conclusion that Diocesan Church Schoo
must be sectarian, and therefore not entitled
to charter" had just as soon thot schoo
or that Church would have charter as any
other, but objected to this provision. l
stated, "No person shall hereafter be electe'
a trustee Of said institution, unless at tn
time of his election he shall be a member O
and in communion with the Protestan
Episcopal Church." | had no objection
that member of the Episcopal Churcl
should be elected trustee, but did not lik
to enact law that no other person eUe
should be elected to that office.
Senator Sholes subsequently stated tina
he was as much opposed to that provision
as was on general principles. But VIVA
did do /? The Committee on Education
unanimously objected to the provision abov
referred to. stated to the Committee tn
necessity of the provision as stated to M
by Senator Sholes, and the bill was report et
without any recommendation.
left for home on Saturday morning, du
ring my absence the bill came up for con
sideration, and was indefnitely postponed
Such was my action in the case. Had
been present when the bill was considered
should have risen in my place and stated
the reason why such provision was asked
for, as stated by Senator 'Sholes, but could no
have defended it.
In regard to the Fish bill. l did state
when that bill came up for consideration
that there was necessity for the bill. Fol
unless something was done to preserve the
fish" in that river they would most certain
ly be destroyed, as the stream dried uE
during the summer and the fish would die
1t was at this time the amendment was at
tached. After the amendment was passed
| asked mmber to move reconsideration
of the vote, which motive was made but
the motive was laid upon the table by al
most a unanimous vote. You say further
that you presume ''Mr. Newell has voted
fer hundreds Of bills this winter to incorpo-
rate petroleum companies" Here is where
you are wrong again. I uniformly vote
against such bills if vote at ALL With
out doubt may have voted for bills which
ought to have been rejected
Bills have been hurried through without
reading save by the title, and it is almost
impossible to prevent mistakes in the mat
ter
I only regret that you take back what
you had published with such apparent re-
Iuctapce.
l have no regrets as to my course relative
TO those bills, or any other tiIls, $50 far as
my motives are concerned, only regret
my inability to understand the nature and
design of such bills as are neither printed
nor read for the information of the Assem-
bly,. Charge such errors to my want of per-
ceptlon, not to my motives
Will you do me the justice of making
this communication as public as you did
your structures.
Yours, respectfully, f. NEWELL.
Eg- Messrs c. G. Sholes, of this city, w.
d. Doe, of Fond du Lac, and B. F. Hop