The Plymouth weekly Democrat. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1860-1869, 1867-04-18


CoNsIsTExcY.-Thc editor ofthe little black
anl-tan sheet over the way exhausts much
time and space 20 prove thai the publisher OF
this paper IS II uninitigated liar, ana that he
himself is very honest and consistent. We
notice Il few of his Inconsistencies, and then
the reader can Judge of his honesty. Several
weeks ago he wanted to give avery plausible
face 10 statement in relation to our Office,
and stated without authority that we paid
500 for Che Democrat office. y few weeks
later another c~Oloring process was needed To
give plausibility to another statement, and
h announced with rs much regard for con
sistency, thct we paid $500. for the office. If
the editor can reconcile these two statements
~ viii give him credit for being ar "apt
arithmctickcr." sill late: he said the asses
! sortoid himwe did swear 10 orr income last
-piing; when re ficj is THE assessor told him
no such fhing. Ia the SAME paper h. says:
"tnd five remember correctly we read an
affidavit last May orJunc over his 81 -naturc.
swearing that his income was lees than $500,
but il riakeS 10 difference wllaierec as
regards the honesty or morality of the affair,
whether he sWor or not. lIcpaiino income
"a. last year or The year before, that's certain,
but says he gave in his income correctly, How
docs that agree with the following statcmcn;
published By him three weeks AGO:
Within the pastfwo years W. na,e paid for .hc Office
from the proceeds thereof and besides this have added
oytr three hundred dollars worth OF material u The cs-
tahilshulcgt.'
3oih Statements canIoj I've iric, unless his
board, clothes. %riJaTs, whisky, &c. &c. cost
nm nothing whioai3 jar.!!y possible"
The editor thinks he makes a point against
Us by stating that We pa::i no incometax las,
year. Now, how do you know we paid 10
ncome tax last year: Answer this question,
ii You please. Did you read an affidavit
OYER our Signature to that effect? or did the
assessor I'll You We "swore' 50, and so? Is
theTc any foundation Cor such u statement.
The editor conyicts himself out Of his own
mouth, Tor VIC were TO. as cscd at all
Tor 1860 until after his statement WIS made
What authority, then, had he for charging
that we paid no income tax? None what
ever. 1t is purely a fabrication of his own,
and shows very plainly how hard run lie is
for capital out ofwhich to make q case against
us. 1t secms he cannot gcti il through his pate
how we could pay for our office, in two years
and during that time add over $500 worth Of
! material to the Establishment and yet pay nc
income tax fer the year 1865. Both state
| ments," he says, cannot be true" Why ar,
, these statements not both true? and in villa
manner are our Office receipts Of 1866, ant
up to Marcel, It'll, 1867, affected by our incom'
for 1860? There is one conclusion to be ar
e rived at from his rcaS,ninU apl TINT ic if.
man does not make $500 one year he canine
l possibly make more than 5000 the next year
1 This is about as sensible as hts reasonin:
I generally, and shows a brilliancy of ~intcllec
i unsurpassed in the annals of ncwspaperdoin
The reference in the extract TO our wlisk.
1 bill is but another evidence Of the editor
growing propensity for low scurrility an
I dirty slang. Cur record will not be injure'
II by attacks from such a source.