Norfolk day book. [volume] (Norfolk and Portsmouth Va.) 1868-1880, 1869-07-15
THE PERFIDY EXPOSED AND
s-. ADMITTED. 1.al; ing

LIZ GhC IL L. LAX OoED AMI
2 .-. ADMITTED. 4.aH f
If low, and vulgar scurrility and
blackguardism can demolish a news
paper we are demolished, by the effort
Of the institution" yesterday morning
But we don't believe it can; for we have
had cart loads of such garbage thrown
at us before by that Identical "institu-
tion' which employed the most motor
ious villifer in the State-the one who
recently traduced the character of a
lady in Richmond, it appears, for the
identical purpose of writing down the
Day Book" "He came, he saw and
he conquered" for daily did the pages
of that sheet TEEN forth with column
after column of the most malicious and
villainous villifcations ever brought
against any one. This continued until
some of their own subscribers, as we then
learned, called on them and endorsed
our character, and told them that their
conduct towards us was disgraceful, and
unless it was stopped they wished no
more Virginians left at their doors.
But this never repaired the injury in
Aicted on us by falsehood and malice,
for they never had the manliness to
come out and acknowledge the baseness
Of their attacks. t...
The brutal epithet Of a lilo or liar, APP
piled to gentleman, rather goes back
on him who applies it, unless be eau
prove it SO; and certainly no one that
has read the production of the Z" insti-,
tuition" yesterday but can plainly see
that the individual, M. Glennan, places
on record much stronger and more
forcible admission even than we charged
them with. Quoting his own language
and not suppressing its qualifying clause,
as be has done in quoting ours; II am
authorized by Mr., Ruffin to state that
he did not vote for Mr.. Walker We
don't know what could be more positive
and unequivocal than that, when taken
In connection with Glennan's language
in our Office, that IF ANY OTHER
member of their firm did SO scratched
Walkers name from the ticket, HE DID,
NOT KNOW IT." Our language on Sat-
urday was "when it is asserted on our
streets" and "nor are we asserting pos
itively that they did So" And our Ian
guage on Tuesday was "the owners,
managers and employees of which seem
to have carried out its teachings at the
polls, by scratching Walker and voting
against the constitution" The word
"seem," in this case we should think,
makes it anyt hing but positive asser-
ton, and as one of the institution"
called on us on Saturday, he failed to
deny the "street assertion" we mentioned
that morning. .ra,i 4
Walker was scratched by one mem.
Der of the institution" that's clear.
The others are "mum;" but another
member bet that Wells would be elect
ed that's not denied and if people
are disposed to draw differences they may
say that man generally votes he ticket
he bets on. But they probably all
voted against the Constitution, which
votes, if they prevailed, would have de-
MED Virginia a popular government,
and continued Wells under the military
rule for an indefoite~period and that's
what the institution wanted; aud
that's our charge made before the cleo
ton as we'll as since. The institu-
tion," few days before the election.
indicated choice for Walker, as be-
tween the two men, but denied him
Constitution under which to be Cover
nor. 1t held with the hare (Walker)
but it run with the hounds to kill him.
The per6dy is CLEARLY proved. an.
Here we might have ended but few
words may be devoted to the conceited
and self important young man of rapid
growth. who signs himself NJ. Glen
nan" and who has seen fit to write
card "To the Public" which he pub
fishes in this columns of the Norfolk
Virginian. One would suppose that
an individual who INDUCES fondness
for calling much older and much better
men than himself liars" would at
least be shrewd and Just enough TO
contine himself to the truth. We never
charged that the owners, managers
and employees of the Norfolk Viiginian
scratched Mr.. Walkers name at The
late election" We stated that it was
so rumored about the streets, and we
thus gave the Virginian an opportunity
to deny it, if, indeed, it was untrue.
As no deniatwas given we reiterated the
rumor in an article on Tuesday last, but
was careful to say that it would "sEEM"
to be true. We now leave the public
to judge whether or not our, inference
was natural one, M. Glennan says