The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1875-11-11
Ths gennsha Qelegrsph'
KENosHA, WIS. NOV. Il, 1875.


your issue of November A 1875, appear
cd vile personal attack upon me over
the name Of Thomas Monaghan. Hav-
ingsallowed dirty scoundrel to use
your columns as funnel through which
to throw his nastiness at those who never
injured you, hope You will be just
enough to publish this reply.
The Union under the conduct Of M.
Webster pursued very different course
on a similar occasion In the spring OF
1874 this same fellow wrote two scarril
Gus letters to me, copies of which he
retained and read TO whomsoeVer would
listen to him. He finally offered them
10 Mr.. Webster for publication in the
columns of his paper but although he
and the author then susta ined the rela-
ton to each other of counsel and client
and were political friends while on the
'other hand, he and I Were at enmity
and were politically opposed, yet he
nobly refused 10 allow his journal TO be
used for purposes of private malice. 1t
seems that in you vas found moe
pliable snhject.
And now few words about the suit
of Thomas Monaghan gerSats School
District No. One of the town of Randall"
which is the burden of the communica.
ton to which am replying.
Tbs was an action brought IN the
name Of Thomas Monaghan by the
clerk and treasurer of the dlsdrict, for
the purpose of determining whether
the district, OF they Themselves, should
pay the teacher of school which they
had had without authority of law and in
defiance Of a vote Of the district. Iii de-
Tending. the district in that suit, I was
seeking to estabjiSh'the principle that
the district at its aunual and legal spec
ial meetings had the right 20 say how
much school it should have In excess of
five months, and that when is officers
defied lis wishes 50 expressed, they
should suffer the appropriate penalty
by themselves paying the unlawful liza
bilities they had so incurred. There
was no thought or intention of cheating
the teacher out Of her pay. or of break
ing up the school. Tn prosecuting the
defense / didsno more than nv duty un-
der the law. had mo- discretion in the
matter. Had'I done less than did do.
I should have been justly liable to be
thrown out of office for negl.c. ofofficial
duty. Every legal step that I took
was under the advice of eminent coub-
sci who was the best that could get ia
the county, all the others having been
retained by the real plaintiff before the
commencement of the suit. From the
beginning 10 the end of this contest
Thomas Monaghan was only a tool In
the hands of men, who are as far above
In mental endowments as the educated
and refined European Is above the rude
and brutal Guinea regro hs.ise yat
1t is stated that We are beaten. IF so
that is no Disgrace. We were beaten in
the Circuit Court By a false and mutiia-
ted record of the annual meeting of
1873, rs. made by the district clerk,
one of rhe real plaintiffs. 'tBut why
did you not show that it was false %
may be asked. We tried to, but the
court ruled out our testimony. saying
that We ought to have applied tor a.
writ of mandamus and had the record
corrected before going to trial. Besides
hu10 and Justice do not always agree.
Lawyers opinions are not always relia-
BILE as we have found 10 our cost And
the very courts themselves are not infal-
hble. May we net then all be excused
for an occasional error Of Judgment ? 4
J so far as our !" sWee' education MS con-
cerned have this to say. NY brothers
and myself have all got fair common
school education, which Wa have mostly
acquired in the common schools of this
s!ate,-except one, who before his school
days were over was killed by rebel bull
lets On the battlefield, at the very time
when this fellow was helping the enemy
by fire in the rear.
NY father and myself do not believe
that az obscure individual, who was in
"Oblivion" until less than teo years ago,
and whose mediooritY VIII soon sink !
him into the same "oblivfon" sgain,