The Emporia news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1859-1881, 1867-08-09

lys out we uOn want our sttSuSlu uuusI
rated. Truly yours.
Mas. j. H. SLocUM.
VS. found on our table, Wednesday
morning. the above communication from
Mrs Slocum in relation to the petition
published last week, our remarks thereon,
aud the list of sixty nine names which
we're not on her petition. We publish
this communication, not that We think it
will accomplish any good to any party.
but because Mrs. Slocum seems to want
it published. We will state here that we
have done everything in our power to
keep from getting into any unpleasant con
troversy With the female suffrage people.
While we have, from the frat, been oP
posed 10 the female amendment to our
constitution, We have given its advocates
room in our paper, treated them as well
as we could, felt that if they could carry
their measure fairly We should not feel
bad, and should not engage in any bitter
fight in opposition. We have had good
degree Of friend, hip for them, but could
not conscientiously support their pet
measure. This feeling we desired to con-
tinue, aud 50 expressed ourselves on all
occasions. Judge of our surprise then
when we read the above prevaricatiug and
unfair communication. We thought af-
ter stating fairly and candidly. as We did
last week, our position, that We would be
understood, andthat there would be nc
further attempts to ''drive US to the wall, u
so far as we were personally concerned
We cannot imagine the object of this
letter. unless it is to crafty a little i'll
feeling toward US for refusing to publish
dirty, "slang whang" personal attack
on gentleman in this village, who differ:
with Mrs. S. on fsmals suffrage. Will e
We have been willing at all times to pub
fish her articles in advocacy of her prin
ciPles. we canuot make this paper the or
gan of her personal spleen and hatred
OuS uiuSt Sot'lS 'Has Win VIC peIeOu al
luded to without our aid. A few words
in reply to some Of her statements
First, let US say that the list of sixty min,
names was made out as mere memoran
dunn sor our own use. not intending tha
it should be paraded before the public
Had this been our object We should bav,
prepared it with greater cafe aud publish
ed it. Mrs. Siocum's remarks about lhs
''intimidating policy" which she imag
ines was pursued 10 get 'seven infuen
tial names" from her petition. are entirely
unfOunded-trumped up. They tool
them of on their own motion, so far a,
We know. none of them having been sin.
Iimidated" or threatened, and some o
them, (if NJ 8. Slocum must know ID,
truth sending US word that they haC
been induced 10 sign it through misrepre
sentaIiou. So far as We are concerned ".
never uttered word or syllable to any o
them that would induce them to take tbeil
names from the petition. We do not, il
single instance, know of any infiueuc,
being used 10 bring about that result
We do know that, in two cases, relative,
advised the ladies to let their names re,
main. Her statement that "Wonen dar,
not assert their views on this subject i.
simply ridiculous, and an assumption
that every woman would abe as brave a.
NE if they dared"
She says: "Iu making up the name.
of the sixty-nine ladies = / end
you have included tie names 1oakdraOa
from the petition, and Jet these ladies',
left to themselves, (another gentle hiut
that the women have no minds of their
own are not opposed 10 the movement. -
We never said t5isy were. We never
thought they vera. We never cared {
straw whether they we're OF not. On the
other hand, We distinctly stassd that =.