The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1875-07-22
Must the Copperhead Union
Continue to Utter the Black
guardism and Lies of Its
FditOr 2

"opens an editorial or over cOiuun
in small print as follows:
esThe readers Of the UNION will
bear testimony to the fact, that we
have never written an unklnd OF
disrespectful word of Haze McKln-
LEY until after repeated personal at
tacks and insults from him. The
readers of the Telegraph will also
bear testimony that he has on more
than one occasion, most grossly and
uniustly attacked and personally
insulted us.
It will be seen by the above that
the editor OF the Union spells our
first name differently from what we
spell it and differently from what
we have ever noticed it to appear
before in the Union. And this
spelling is not accidental, for it APP
pears spelled the same way no less
than five times in the same editorial.
TO spell the name as he does he has
to remove two letters and substitute
two others making four changes.
Apply his method of change to his
own first name and 1t will appear
worse with the same number OF chan
ees than he makes our name appear.
Pursuing his own method and he
has but to take one from Isaac and
lit appears Isac append k and it
appears Isack ; remove / and sack
remains change the small $ for a
capital S and he has Sack for his
first name and he thus becomes
Sack Webster.
The truth is exactly the reverse
OF the above statements by the edi-
tor Of the Union. He has labored
perslstently for years to Witty us
personally and to injure the TELE-
GRAPH. And he knew well that we
did not intend to notice any of his
personal attacks and abuse and he
felt chagrined that he failed to pro-
woke us into personal retaliation.
Having failed to provoke US into any
personal controversy even after pub
fishing lies IN relation to the relative
circulation Of the Union and the
TELEGRAPH, he now has the efrontry
and impudence in speaking Of US to
say. awe know of nothing in the
moral or intellectual character or So
cial standing of Haze Mckinley,
which Justly commissions him 20 in
suit us or wound the feelings of our
family without chastlsement." Now.
however much we may have despised
the meanness, the vulgarlty, the
blackouardism, the profanity, and
the lying OF the editor of the Uaaaon,
we have always respected his family
and have ne.er uttered one word in
Relation to them. And we have
never given admission to articles
rejecting unjustly or even severely
upon himself and never to any, as
far as we know, rejecting upon his
family. But we can call to remem-
braucerejectin one article rejecting
severely but perhaps justly upon
himself and not very fayorably upon
one of his family. And we remem-
Der we'll when the subject was al
Iuded to by himself and US in our
office that he declared in an outburst
of profanity that if he-the writer Of
the article--ever said one word
against that person he would shoot
him. Now he and the writer of that
article, if not in the same be ! in low
ing embrace, are SO near it that their
editorial and correspondence effu-
sions uppear in the same paper in
malign disgrace.
The editor OF the Union denies that others than
hlmse f furnished the money means to establish
the Union and leaves it to be inferred that they
never furnished the money means to continue its
publication. In this the editor must talsify or the
others have made wrong representations as to the
establishment and support of the Union. Only
about a year ago one of the others said to us In
our Office that he was receiving the Union On his
stock ir the concern, and that the paper was all
he had ever received for his stock. And it was
generally understood a few years ago that the
others refused TO advance any more money means
fox the support Of the Union concern. The ques-
ton of the establishment ard support of the UL-
ion was introduced by the editor and publish er O
that paper in his first article bosstingly and
falsely claiming for the Union larger circulation
tran the Telegraph and whatever we have said in
relation thereto came justly in response to his
o WI Boosting and lying.
In the Union of June nth, the editor, in speak
il Of asking OF Schoff and Vinegar, the pub
fishers of the elegraph, the use of one or two
columns fo- the advocacy of principles and ideas
which he and others thought should have an ad
vocacy in this community, ne says, I'VE received
the following laconic and emphatic reply We
want no id copperhead writings 10 our paper =
Showing by his quotation from Schoff and Win
egar that they understood the. principles and
ideae which he wanted the use OF one or two col
q mps IN the Telegraph TIC advocate were the
rfra voo ifor