Cleveland daily leader. [volume] ([Cleveland, Ohio]) 1865-1873, 1866-04-13
About Liars.
fErom Abe Now York Tribuue I

The Herald, in urging thepeople of
Connecticut TO vote for English in order to
sustain the Presidents policy" saw tit to
say:
"The Presidents party belive in on
Quoting this Government for the benefit of
forty millions of White people, and of all
people of other compilations who may seek
its protection; the party opposed to him
you'd bultGnp an GrtStoeracy ofthrse mill
ions Of negroes haging peculiar rights ana
PTfUlLeges, and superior to White men IN
eOery legal respect"
Now, the above is either a most impor-
tant truth ora wicked, deliberate, villain
Gus liei for there can be no pretense of mis-
take or error in the premises. If the par
ty termed Radical have proposed to create
AN aristocracy of three millions of ne-
groes, having peculiar rights and privi-
leges, and superior to White men in every
legal respect, then the PROPOSITIONS of
Constitutional Amendments or ord nary
legislation wherein they have embodied
such purpose must be extant and their
citation the ready mode of j~ustifying The
Hsraids averment and confounding all
gainsayers.
But, if such citation is impossible, be-
cause there are no such propositions 10 be
cited, then the averment is not merely "a
gigantic lie. lie with circumstance and
deliberate intent-but it IS, in view of all
the facts, a peculiarly cruel, wicked Liza
lie c%oncocted and uttered in the interest OF
injustice and oppression, with intent to
uphold iniquity and perpetuate wrong
Such this particular lie seems to us-a lie
eminently calculated, if ever lie could, to
invoke on the head of its author the light
nings of Heaven.
The Nei0 York Times sees fit to NEEDLE
with this matter in its usual sidewise, slip
perry fashion, talking about the class of
people which INDUCES in this sort of arqu-
meHt.' Now there is no Grga1Hent in
this case. You can hold no argument
with q willful, conscious liar. Boots do
not argue. They have a different function
altogether. But, since The Times has
seen lit 10 interpose in the premises, we
viii ask it to answer a few plain questions
-ri-:
I. Is the sverment of The Herald, or is
it not, a lie?
II. II a lie, is it not clearly, a cruel,
WICKED lie, calculated 10 llllre the Already
oppressed and Observation-Disclosures, d
lie deserving the severest fe%probation2
III. If it be such 8 lie, would it not be
wrong to countenance anddignify the liar
by descending to any "sort of argument
with him on the subject? You do not
argue with a thief, a burglar, an assassin:
then why should you with a deliberate,
atrocious ligr2
". If it be wrong to lie, to the cruel
injury of the innocent and defenseless,
why is it not right and just to expose and
rebuke the liar2 And why is it not the
duty of the Press to do this in the plainest
and most effective manner2
We have an account to settle with the
veteran journalist, who is permitted to
garble and distort letters and documents
in The Times to our prejudice; but We will
let that stand till we ascertain, if we may,
what are the views of the important points
wherein u ideas are set forth in this ar
ticle. Win it be pleased to be direct and
specific!