Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1866-12-13
RUTLAND HERALD.
SATURDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1866.
Atwaser VS.. Walton.


the merits OF the Vermont Directory
apon the first appearance of that work,
to which we made a brief reply. But
wallnns not heiug out at the time no
comp -ison OF the two could be institu-
ted, al we awaited its appearance. We
have received copy, and with 1t a cir
cular, which, had we room, we should
be glad to give to our readers for the
purpose of showing the Gninw of its
publisher, but its length forblds, and
while we are always glad to have our
errors corrected the extreme efforts
made by Walton, the present year, to
point out our errors in Atwater's Direc-
tory, which we have published for sew
eral years past, is to us an evidence of
weakness. Walton's Register has been
so long proverbial for inaccuracies and
inexcusable blunders, that he has been
driven to the resort of a special effort to
look up some errors in its most success
ful competitor, TO partially hide its own
faults behind them. In this attempt, he
is like the silly ostrich, which only hides
its head, leaving the whole body exposed.
We nave never claimed perfection for the
Vermont Directory. Such a pretence,
or even an attempt to make such work
perfect, would be absurd. But we know
this publication has a well earned and
established reputation for being far
more reliable business directory and reg
lister than Walton's. We have been sat
tsfied with its popularity and patronage,
without condescending to hunt up and
publish the faults Of Walton. But
since he mas taken this course, it is not
improper that we reply to his attempts
to disparage our publication and his
claim to perfection for his own.
In his criticisms, Walton says his reg
lister has some things not found in the
directory. So does the directory contain
several matters of value not in Walton's
such as full list Of all the Vermont
Governors, 1T. Governors, Senators and
Representatives for Congress in Vef-
mont, from the organization of our State
and date of their election, which alone is
worth the price Of the Directory,-and
other things, which we regard as of
more value to Vermonters than items
contained in WSlton's Register and not
in the Directory. He has some matters
which we do not consider essential to a
Vermont Register.
But aside from the amount of con-
tents, he says that in our Directory the
timetable of courts is incorrect. 1t is
true, in part of our edition (the first cop
les printed) we had an error in the time
Of Orange County Court, which was
changed by the legislature after the table
was prepared for the press. And how is
it in Walton's boosted Officials :" In
looking at his table, the first line con-
tains an error which he has had for years,
making the date of the court about six
months behind the time
As to the population Of Vermont,
which Walton says is incorrect in liz
towns as given in Atwaters Directory,
we have only to say that this table was
prepared officially, by the State Marsha
aasot, especially for this Directory, and
copied with great care from his o1cm Jig
seres. In the present edition, our print
ers had pulled some figures out OF the
table which were not returned when the
pages went to press, so that In six towns
only, viz Bradford, Braintree, Brook,
field, Milton, Shelburn and Wheelock, II
the present edition, the figures should bt
corrected by putting a | at the begin
ming Of each, Or by referring to the Di
rectory Of 1866. Otherwise, this may
ne regarded as the only reliable table O.
Vermont population, which we know o
in print. Walton claims to have his
ron q table printed in 1850 by order O
Congress There has been no census o
Vermont taken since 1860, and that VIZ
eve as Official" having received il
directly from what we consider the only
reliable authority, and which has mo-
lost its originality and CORRECTNESS BY
passing through the hands of dozer
clerks or printers at Washington. W.
therefore set down Walton as erroneou:
in more than 100 towns, if in that mum
Der he varies from our official tables.
Our tables of Grand List are said BY
Walton to be incorrect These wer,
furnished US by the clerks, appointed By
the legislature, after being carefully pre-
pared by them. We have been Informed
by them, however, that after they re
ceived the figures, they made one Sigh
change in the figures for Vergennes; s.
that, aside from this, we understand GU
agures to be just as they were finall
submitted and accepted by the legisls
ture. We are also informed that the
discovered some errors in the list of di
ferent towns, after giving US the figure
and before giving them to Walton, an
that the legislature did not authori2
+ha;r c,,r~cction This we did not knO,