The Jackson standard. [volume] (Jackson C.H., Ohio) 1847-1888, 1873-06-12

fleece me?
| Your miserable subterfuge in explanation of
that thereafter is not only a very lame anaIr, ar
| year old boy in Jackson, who does not know
| that threat scds intended for nae, and now When
plicating a man in your own town, who has
been in your way good while.
That is about the silliest part of your
piece. No man is in my way, either in
Jackson or any where else. l have hosts
of friends and what prize most is the
fact that my nearest neighbors are my
warmest friends, regardless of party or
creed.
You then say:
If you "thank God there is hearafrer, in
however innocent he may be, you are even
more vile than had supposed, and advise
School, tor unless your morals are improved,
susan D. anthony viii never recogndze me- you as
Mr.. Mackley, your denialS and preVaricatIons
all the points in your letter, which 1 deem en-
titled to notice, propose, after your own STYLE
your friend 1 would not if I had the
power, harm you further than to return blow
for blow, in self defense. Why is it, that OF the
thousands of letters which have received dur
ing the past six years none have been preserved
| Before had become acquainted with you per-
sonally, 1 was told that you We're ''crotchety
you as best / could" Subsequently was told,
that if l wanted to keep on the right side OF
| Mackley, must do something tor him or his
connections. Ny observation and Intercourse
well timed. Hence have been on my guard
The above is about as silly as the other
The latter part is all false. No one ever
told you any such things about me.
Here you come again:
Did you not for some time prior to my NOM
inatio1 in 1870, publish ali the little sc1rrilous
articles against me that came 10 hand, and
doubtless of defeating my nomination? Do you
remember a short article in the Cincinnati
And do You not remember having abused the
Gazette like piclSpocket, for that article?
What is the use of your saying
1 opposed your nomination in 1870?
There is not one oord of truth in
it. l have all my papers bound, in the
form of books, for the past twelve years.
1 have taken the pains to examine them,
and l find that 1 spoke highly of you
all through the spring and summer of
1870 Why eoiH you continue to lie about this
matter? Come and examine my files and
point to one o0ord ever said against you.
The Democratic papers charged that
you pretended to be free trader in
Adams county, where the tariff was not
so popular as in the iron districts.
published some of these articles, to call
your attention to it. The Cincinnati
Gazette turned free trade very suddenly,
after visit of Gen. Brinkerhoff to Gin
cinnati. The Democratic papers said
that you had turned to be a free trader
and the Gazette seemed to favor" your
nomination because you had so turned
You had not sense enough to know that
l abused the Gazette in your interest.
In an editorial in the STANDARD August
! IL, l870-the last issue before the con
vention which nominated you, I said
| this:
is our first choice and Mr.. Wilson our second
No paper in this district has stood up more
warmly and firmly for John 7. Wilson than has
he STANDRD; but we place no man before the
interests OF our Try as those interests are
of the Republican party.
You still pretend that there was ne dis
affection toward you except what existed
in Jackson county, and that am respon
sible for that Here is the way in which
the Portsmouth Tribune started out in its
first issue alter your nomination:
SIT would be untruthfuI in us to attempt tc
fection in the district, but more especially il
Scioto county. An adjournment until the frs
! | of September would have given time to cool of
and look over the field and consult in spirit o
forbearance, prom pied by desire to do wha
: charges and assault upon Mr.. Wilson engender-
) ed heated animOSity in the convention, and
drove the more moderate delegates to unite witt
those determined on nominating Wilson.
: in the face and weigh the chances and count the
cost.
There was equally serious trouble in
Adams county, and the following is taken
; from the West Union Defender, describing
? the situation at the county convention
which appointed delegates to the Con
gressional convention:
! We heard one Republican say who lives il
Liberty township, that it the worst set VI
thing that ever he saw. There is great dea
OF sW g ana f6 ahntng ABOUT the atteF and
f who have cut loose from the party and avoM
Democracy. The breach between the Wilson
! and the anti-WilSon men has been wideneC
and it is the determination of the anti-Wilsor
men to defeat Wilson at the Convention if they
can, and if not then successful they will use
, The best part of the whole affair was a speech
! delivered by Mr.. E. P. Evans, in favor of free
on to show the fniquities of the present tariff
} and the rascalities of the present Congress in
! true light. He spoke for nearly hour, the
I most of the time in the presence of Wilson, who
: biushed, and fidgeted and screwed and twist
I
got through, Wilson was called out and in 6
speech remarkable for is hypocrisy and untruth
stated that he guessed they could take the stumI
! | together. Mr.. Evans was particularly severe on
? the ptg-iron tariff, and stated that that SwndlE
> womdhav to be stopped, all of Which Wilson
! ed and a half dozen influential Republican,
have signed their names to a document which
/ will be circulated among the tariff men of the
: District which will efeotualIy "cook Wilson's
goose"
So it seems you was playing the Maj
Bagstock's game of low trickery there
pretending to be free trader. The fact
: that influential Republicans were going
: to circulate your free trade speech among
: the furnaces, and the fact that the Gin
cinnati Gazette was supporting you be
cause you s0as a free trader, is why deemed
it important to print large number Of
, your tariff speeches for general circula
t ton all over the district, which matter is
referred to in my next comments.
Again you say:
Why, sir on the question of tariff, you surely
have not forgotten your efforts to mOSe the peo
} pie believe that was really free trader, not
l on the subject? And did you not say in you
, five hundred dollar letter that it would be nee
essary to republish my tariff speech, which wa
, not done?
5 When you made your tariff speech, al
: once publis he'd it in full in the STAND
: ARD. Ny recollection now is that the
STANDARD was the only paper in your dis