The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1874-07-09

lsWEr have just read an article from the
Austin STATESMAN, headed Governor Coke,
the citizens of Austin, 2. etc., which is so
full of the animus that characteriZes- de-
feated Iaspirants and, half-hearted adherents
to the Democratic party, that we cannot re-
main silent and let its assertions pass ur-
noticed!tId Il T. aT9 49, /
tFiyer since the STATESMAN failed to Sc
cure the public printing, by reason of the
disgraceful action of the man Montgomery
and the NeaoS managers, It has clearly
evineeda disposition to censure Governor
Coke and his administration. Like the
Galveston Netoss the STATESMAN has shown
itself ready to joinin a hue and cry against
Governor Cokels administration or to damn
it with very faint praise. .''--Meeid Ledger
Weare really surprised at the ledger for
making such declarations as the above. 1t
is SO contrary to the clear and correct views
Of thaVndper that weaFe inclined to believe
that the STATESMAN is not received regu-
larly by the Ledger, for we cannot think
that such ASSERTIONS would be made if the
facts had been known and considered by
the editor Now, the Ledger will admit
that we had cause for Irritation when the
sr
bid of the STATESMAN was opened, and
Montgomery permitted to go in peace
But, after the Telegraph was awarded
the public printing, we cheerfully
acquiesced, and said that Mr. Gray
had taken. the contract at very low rates,
but that he was a clever man, and if he
could work, through and save himself, we
would be glad. We do not give the words,
but. the substance. Subsequent to that
event, the Governor signifed his desire to
be on friendly terms with the STATESMAN
office. Not desiring to keepup the wrang-
ling, we. cordially accepted the PROPOSE
ton, and passed by several articles of pa
pers which reflected upon us.
Butwhen the Governor returned to Waco,
June 6, he opened the printing muddle
again and denounced the STATESMAN, using
this language, that the two papers finding
that they could neither S9uy nor bully him,
had tried ''to crush him. +" We could not
believe that the E.uaminer had reported
his speech correctly, and therefore, one
of the proprietors wrote note
to the Governor to know if the
report was true2 He replied that it was
substantially Now we ask the Ledger, and
we shall look for a reply, if it was wrong
for us to defend ourself and show the in.
consistencyof the Governora These were
monstrous charges, and, if true, ought tc
consign this paper to infamy. But they
were entirely grouhdless. Then the Er
Gminer followed up the report Of his speech
by a scurriIous article about the rings and
eliques Of Austin, in accordance with what
i purported to be a view of the Governor;
remarks. The article alluded to by the
Ledgerwas in reply, giving the offensive re
marks of the Examiner. Was that Sorong
Since that time, we have commended thu
Governor when we believed that he wa
right, and criticised his acts when we be
lieved that he was wrong.
But we deny most emphatically that VI
are actuated by malicious feelings, or cen
sure the Governor when we believe that h
is right We would greatly prefer to Sc
evidence on his part Of sincere desire t,
correct. any errors into which he may hav
unwittingly fallen. And, as we have befor
stated in previous issues, it is our intention
to judge his administration by his acts, con
demning. what is wrong, and cheerfully sup
porting what is right. We have never acte,
with any other than the Democratic party
and do not intend to be driven from tn
support of Democratic principles either b,
the croakings of captious critics or tn
Establishments Of power.