The Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1855-1875, 1873-09-20

with the nomination. Was it not
open to all! Was it not conducted
rs every nomination has been for
twenty years! And if, as you pre-
tend, 80 few persons attended and
voted, why did you not take advan-
tage of the occasion and call in
your hosts of friends, and snatch
victory from the hands of the cor
rupt rings and cliquess What a
splendid triumph for injured inno-
cence; what a grand occasion for a
Republican who "has no conceal
ments to make on that point
Republican who is ''no disorganizer
and have no disposition 70 disturb
the harmony of the party"
You are no disorganizer, when
they organize you, you wont disturb
the harmony when the music sounds
for you. Great man! And you
promise us you wont split our old
blood stained, time honored party
wide open! In the name of the
Republican party, I thank you.
You say you 'shave been in the way
of some of these men in the past,
and it is possible I may be in the
future Whose way have you been
ins Not, surely, the members of the
bar, almost a briefess lawyer in this
county and ''all that sort of thing"
except such little game as you could
pluck when on hunt.
Your partner, Uriah Heap, who
sneakingly got up the salary grab
question, is in no better condition.
You end your partner do kind of
business that is not in competitor
with any gentleman of the profess
sion. You are not in the way OF
old criminals who violate the law.
They say it is perfect luxury, af-
ter going through hazardous en-
terprize of stealing, shooting, or
house breaking, to be boarded and
kept at the public expense until
they slip through your fingers.
Their cry is ''Oh, Lord, give unto
us Holland for judge!"
| And since you invite investigation
by saying II can only offer my past
life, conduct, habits, and character,
as guarantee for my conduct in
future, Il propose to ask you a
few questions which the people will
want answered: Will you turn the
public to the case Of Schofeld vs..
Holland. in 37th Ind. Rep'ts, page
| 220, and tell them? Is it true that
you sold Schofeld farm in Fay
cite county for 1000, payable in
/ 20 years with interest from date,
payable annually, and gave bond
for a deed! Is it true that you
greatly deceived him as to its value
and productiveness, so that he CON-
planned to you, and promised to
reduce the price if he would keep
the farm in good cultivation, and
did Schofeld under this promise
clear off and fence 100 acres, put
it all in grass, and pay you all he
made except poor meagre living,
and did Schofeld pay you $500
and give you his notes for S1,3OG
more by your demand, besides the
$4,000 you still held, and did You
tell Schoield that you had chance
to sell the farm for $500, and
could get no more and if he would
consent to the sale, you would give
up his notes and take note fo,
$500 in four payments. Did yor
thus impose upon poor confdine
farmer, one of the honest people
who can't attend nominating cleo
tions? Is it true that when YOU
told Schofeld you could get but
$500 for the farm, that you hac
already secretly and sneakingl,
sold it to another man TO. fourteen
thousand five hundred dollars?
Will you tell the farmers ane
mechanics who could not get to tn,
Kibbey nomination, whether 20,
did this base and Infamous act?
will answer for you-when you suet
Scho6eld in the Franklin cou atty
where your reputation is be tie
known than here, he set up tn,
, above facts and by your pleading
you acknowledged the above fl ct
to be true. The case went to tn
Supreme Court, you were appeSle'
. and Schofeld was appellant Her
is part of what the Supreme Judge
! slapped you in the face with: ''N7
are quite clear that the fact states
, in the answer showed that the ap
pellant was induced to surrenG e
p his interests in the farm, and &C
o cept of the terms offered by the ap
,, pellee by the false and fraudulen
representations of the appellee