The Leavenworth weekly times. [volume] (Leavenworth, Kan.) 1870-1880, 1876-11-02
0Neeklp Gimes
THEY PLEAD GULLY.

In the Lo terry Organ Of Sunday morn
ing appeared the defence Of George is
friends to the charges of corruption and
rascality, upon which the Republicans OF
Leayenworth have ar-aingned him. In or
der thu! the Repub,icans of the State may
see what these men have to say in defence
OF their friend, We repubiish their Produc-
ton in full. They needn't have taken the
trouble OF going 10 Topeka for a publisher.
We would have taken pleasure in printing
their document in THE TINES, and will
GLADLY give IL all the circulation we can, in
order to let the public see its weakness. 1t
Is virtually plea Of guilty. Although it
fills almost column it does not say one
word in ,refutation OF any Of the serious
charges which are now before the people.
1t does not even deny their truth. 1t does
not even assert that the signers OF the docu-
ment themselves disbelieye the truth OF the
charges 1t simply attempts to misrepresent
the character Of the great Republican de-
monsiration at Laing'5 Hall last Tuesday
evening, at which the proof OF all the
charges was read, and the resolutions re-
pudiating George T. were adopted. III the
document were all true it would amount
II nothing, for it does not touch upon the
truth OF ialsity OF the charges in question,
at all but it is not true; it is false in
every essential particular, and all these
who were present at the meeting know that
the assertions are mainly false.
The paper, as it appeIr5 in the Commoa-
Uoahk, has attached TO it one hundred and
seyenty-three signatures of these. more than
one-half are names that never were heard
II before, and which the people Of Leaven-
worth don't know anything about. OF those
who are known, many are 80 notorious as TO
Tequire no comment, and their connection
nth the document will be the best evil
ence that could be furnished the people
, the State that the thing is fraud it is
Ut necessary to single them out the people
4 the State know them, and know that
the very fact Of their connection with any
Movement Is proof that there is something
rotten in it. la addition 20 these the list
contains the names Of several men who de-
clare they did not sign it, and OF a good
many Others who were not at the meeting,
and signed the paper through a misappre-
-hensicn OF its character. Take the follow
Tor samples-which We found in an hours
investigation, yesterday morning:
Sidney Smith, whose name is published
as one Of the signers, was not at the meet
ing, and says he didn't sign the paper.
n. J. Waterman says he WAS no: at the
meeting.
r. W Wood says he was not at the meet.
ing.
G. Ii. Weaver says he was not at the
meeting.
c. B. Brace says he was not at the meet.
ing.
W. N. Fortcscue says he was not at the
meeting.
N. Hoffman says he was not at the meet.
ing.
We know that score Of others whose
names are attached to the paper, were no,
at the meeting, but We have given only the
names Of those who personally stated to us
yesterday that they were no: present. And
number OF Others, who reTe present, say
they signed the paper under a lnisappre-
hension-it was so long they didn't take
time 20 read il, and were told by those who
presented it that it was simply a general
endorsement Of the Republican ticket. 1t
viii be seen by looking over the list, that
nearly all the respectable business men OF
tie city refused to sign it, although they
were bored and importuned 70 do so, Tor
four days, by platoon of George t. bum
meIs. The solid men Of Leayenworth are
to be congratulated for the positive manner
in which they have refused to take part in
til. dis-eputable attempt TO misrsp7esent
lhe position of the LeayensoTth Rerubli-