Marshall County Republican. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1856-1878, 1867-05-03
o he gspnblisaa.
% The FORGERY Case.

on the part Of he Plymouth Democrat to
palm off an article which originally APP
peares. in quasi Republican paper,--edit-
ell by an inordinately greedy fellow like the
junior aof the Democrat. who got mad and
turned on his political friends because they
refused to grant all The favors he asked
as an extract from the indianapolis Journ-
al In reply TO our exposure, the Demo
crat says:
I've saw the article copied in number
OF our exchanges and credited 10 the Journ-
al; suPposing 1t all right, we did the same
thing, and all the evidence we have that
the article was wrongfully credited, is the
bare assertion of the Republican. poor au
thorlty at best, and very poor when party
interests are in question"
1t NAV be possible the Democrat saw the
changes, credited to The Journal, as it says,
but we doubt it, We exchange with a
number of Democratic papers in this vi
cinity, and If it appeared in any one of
them we failed to observe it. VIII the
Democrat name few Of its exchanges that
published the article and credited it to the
Journal? We predict that the editor will
not name one, knowing If he does we will
citch him as we did not long since about
the affidavit and fasten another lie on him.
Is he nota very proper person to question
the veracity of an opponent? Unlike the
Democrat editor we usually know where
of we affirm We do not ask him to take
our word for it in this or any other in
stance. Here is what the Journal saws in
in regard to the matter:
THE Plymouth (Iarsh2n county, Dem
ocrat saws:
ave published week before last. an ar
ticle from the Indiapolis Journal, reflect
ing severely upon the members of the Lee
gisatrre. That paper charges the mem
bers of its own party with shamefully sell
ing themselves, and lending their votes and
influence in favor Of measures known TO be
detrimental to the pablo interest.
The Democrat did not publish from the
Journsl-weck before last, or any other
week, the lying charge it makes against
the Legislature; on the contrary we have
defended that body from general accusa-
tons of the sort made by others. The
Democrat has committed forgery. or cop
led its article from some other paper, and
mistakenly credited it to the Journal If
the latter is the Ease we request it 10 be
more careful in the future. We don't
want such stuff palmed off upon the pub
lie as coming from this paper"
Is this satisfactory, Mr.. Democrat? Now,
If you do not give the name of the paper
you copied the article from it will be ia
ken for granted that you have lied again,
as usual, in addition to committing forge
~. The Journa. need not be troubled
:b0ut whether the Democrat repeats the
offence or not, for two reasons: LIST, Be
cause it has the least circulation of any
paper in Northern Indiana, and 2d, Be
cause no Republican believes any thing it
publishes, unless he knows it to be true.
In order to palliate its offence the Dem
ocrat charges US with stealing editorial
leaders almost entire from the Cincinnati
Gazette and Chi. Tribune. As regards the
Cincinnati Gazette We can say positively
the charge is absolutely false, as we do not
exchange with that paper, and have not
even seen copy since the last Presiden-
tial election; and if we ever hooked a lead
er from the Tribune the Democrat can of
course give day and date. VIII it please
be little more specific. We NAV have
done what every country editor is compell-
ed sometimes to do, adopt an article; but
we never did that even without indicating
either at the commencement or close of the
article that it was not original. five ever
did it was an oversight. When we have
time We can generally write what we want
to say, but some weeks we have not time
to write, and under such circumstances We
have occasionally adopted a leader, but
never, we think, without acknowledging
our Indebtedness for il to another source
But the Democrat has made the charge and
it must sustain it or acknowledge it has
lied again Won't it be little funny
though If it turns out in this case, as it has
often before, that the accuser is the real
culprit: