The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1875-12-24

If "thc sChoolmaster is abroad" IL would
be well for him to call at the office of the
bloomsbury Republican. He's needed
there
The RepuJiicdn has never been dis
tinguished for literary elegance, but the
curioa-y involved and intricate construction
of the article in last weeks paper relative
to the trial of Samuel Bogart, merits special
mention. Beginning with the undeniable
statement that "Kline was the father in-law
OF Bogart" the writer adds "this marriage
proved to be an unhappy one" 1t is hardly
to be wondered at that marriage between
man and his father-in-law should have been
unhappy, but the fact that such monstrous
union could exist in civilized community
Will surprise most people. The writer goes
on "For years quarrels have been kept up
between the parties. Bogart and his wife
would begin it' (what? quarrels p and by
the time it ended the whole of the Kline
family would be involved" The reader will
notice the hopeless confusion of singulars
and plurals in the above and the same thing
occurs in the next sentence; "Frequent
separations between him aud his wife were
the result Oh ! it were, were it? Beauti-
full indeed $50 il continued for years until
on the 9TH of September last il eliminated
in the death of Mr.. Kline" Wba. was it
that CONTINUED for years" and "culminated
in the death of Mr.. Klinc?" Docs the
writer mean that the Separations" "con-
tinued' and ''culminated ?" ESQ why does |
he say "it' and how could the Separations
of man and wife "culminate" in the death of
a tather-in-law We should have thought
that meetings" were more likely to have
brought about so sad result than "scpara-
tons"
Here is another fine specimen: "Bogart
took pitch fork and rushed upon the old
man and plunged it into his skull from the
effects of which he died" This is the first
case we ever knew where Il man died from
the effects" of skull. Most people have
whether the skulls have "eiIects" or not we
are unable to say. 1t may kill Il man every
time to have "ellects" of the skull. Again
Mr.. Buckalew made one of the best efforts
Of his life in his defence" What Mr.. Buck
alew had done, and how bad it was, we can
not tell but we are pleased to know that he
acquitted himself so we'll. Pronouns and
Propositions, s,singulprs and plnrals give much
r0uDle to the RepUJHcdn'S writer.
More richness: "Ihe charge of Judge
EIwell was an able discussion of the
aw' (discussiOa is good with regard to
murder and made deep impression upon
he minds of all by its exhaustive review of
he evidence and its entire impartiality."
exhaustive OF the evidence in the ull
meaning of that phrase. Judge EIwell said
1 shall not repeat the evidence upon the
ubject of the encounter in detail" and did
II fact refer to the evidence only to explain
hU law bearing upon the points in question.
Judge Elwell will probably be pleased to
,now that he was impartial, and did not
hirst for Bogart's blood. Here is bit of
inc writingi; "a solemn silence pervaded the
Midnight audience as the foreman James
Dyke, handed the verdict to the Clerk of the
jourt who passed it to the Judge. After
le examined it he returned it to the Clerk"
&c. Nothing could have been more i'm
'ressive than this, unless the Clerk had
landed the verdict to the Court-crer, who
lad then given it to the Deputy Sheriff and
le in turn TO the Sheriff who might have
landed it to a tipstave to be by him pre-
ented to the Judge. Nobody would i'm
gine from the wording of the Republican
rtce that the clerk of the Court always
eceives the verdict of a jury and hands it to
he Judge.
Taking it all in all the Repu5ticm may
congratulate itself on having achieved
ucccss in muddy, ungrammatical and l.logi-
al writing, not likely to be readily excelled
II even equalled.
Is the "schoolmaster abroad" or is the
postmaster