The Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1855-1875, 1872-06-01
COURT HOUSE.

Mr.. WIN. A. PKRLE IL am gratined g
think that the use of your name in public
print is not only not offensive 10 you, but is
rather grateful to that sense Of predomina ut
vanity, without which, syour other faculties
seemed dwaried immeasurably .below the
average standard. And perceive no lack in
your composition, to ill up the measure o.
your capacity as q rhetorlcian, writer and
reasoner, but few quavers Of that ineffabie
rhine nth which you tear the feelings Of
your audience into fine shreds u weeping
pathos.
but, Mr.. Peele, don't dislike you because
you possess those traits to degree 30 far
beyond that of many others. We can't all
be great But blessed thought, We may be
good +!
feel like complaining Of you little, for
doing yourself and your cause SO much in
justice. want to meet ami defeat you 10
fair and manly discussion, but don't desire
q triumph obtained through your indiscre-
lions. admit you are liable to fall into err
rors, from the TACT that, in your last article,
without having your previous article before
you. And you are equally liable to fall into
error il you are not y ell fortified with correct
information and an honest desire to impart
it to the public. These are all essential
elements of good and reliable writer.
In your first article, you told the people
"that if the project succeeds that money for
the cree tion and fitting up Of the buildings 1t
Richmond will be drawn from the people,
pockets by way OF taxes,''-
-"and they know too, or can easily know
by examining the law, that although they
property at Centreville ,"-"yet after that is
done, they cannot remore brick or stone, or
anything else attached to the realty"
Now sir, after looking at yourself in tie
above mirror, you who Stand by every word
and letter in that article to copy your own
language, how do you appear to An honest,
thinking and intelligent people, when you W i'll
''palter IN double sense by writing, in an
swer to my gentle admonition to you to ven-
tu.e no more legal opinions,-I gave no
oP'hiou VII tuo QucStOu SuOmItleOy nor OfO
intimate any,
i said in substance in my former article
that after the petitioners
for the relocation. or any part of them, or any
body else had paid the appraised value o.
the county property at Centrevile as fixed BY
the Governors Commissioners, that th,
title thereof would remain unchanged, arc
that the persons thus making that paymen,
would have no legal right to remove bricl
or stone, or anything else of the property.
Now again Sir, what hare you to say? I,
your first articc you distinctly declare a
your sound legal opinion that not stone
brick can be removed from the realty. I,
the last article, having discovered that ever,
farmer in the County who read the statute
would detect your ignorance or gross mis-
representation. you back down like consuro
mate pettifogger; by saying in substance, tina
you didn't mean the County Commissioner
could not remove all the brick and stone, bu
that the .persons' who made the paymer
could not remove them.
Now, as, in your two articles, you hay
conceded all the propositions your learne
communications were intended to comba
my work is accomplished and the whole pit
OF the controversy is at an end.
You admit in your several articles,
LIST, That the signing of a petition fl
relocation does not bind any one signing
pay anything for the property appraised
Centreville.
I'd. That the money we pay into Il
County Treasury will be at the disposal
the Commissioners, to pay for other buildin,
to be erected.
Sd. That the County Commissioners G,
remove every brick and stone to the new |
cstion in Richmond.
4th. That when fifty five per cent. of L
people authorized by law, demand the chang
You will submit like good fellow.
have now succeeded in compelling you
admit in public print over your sigpatu,
what all your allies and coadjutors, runni
} over this County, have falsely msrepresent
to the people, and I can afford Mr.. Peele,
7 be magnanimous.
l must, however, at the risk of inc reasi
T yoursnser little, for was sorry that
thing so clear should have made YOU anp
, admonish you again not to attempt to hi
E your ignorance of the law, by charging
e with imposing too great a burthen on y
/ in reading Gavin and Hord's Statutes ca
fully, and the decisions of our Suprel
a Courts and the Courts of other States, be-
J. ing On this subject. Judging from 20
i, ignorance in collecting material to form opi
q ions. and your eagerness in advanci
them, you will find much in the books
recommend you have hitherto neither 8,
. nor understood. Indeed, judging from
pertinaeity with Which you say you int,
to cling to your opinions, have very lii
:, hope that books will be any service to =
Il nevertheless. as your friend, aud one "
? could hope that the reading of the book
9 suggest in the next fifty years to come, wo
y Leave deeper impress of culture than the 6
years that have passed, it is my duty to
It wise.
1T Furthermore, if you want to drag =,
d honorable friends, the former Board of Cou
Il Commissioners, who violated their pledges
k the people, into this controversy, you car
10 80 and when I get through with them
Y some of their written pledges laid away
use. you will find that the only excuse,
gument or palliation that can be offered
the deep and outrageous wrongs commit:
will be boot leather. That is the never fai
l. argument of the man whose chief streu
cs lies in his legs. In this capacity you CO
serve your friends well, but never beg