Ottumwa weekly courier. (Ottumwa, Wapello County, Iowa) 1872-1899, 1876-04-26
From the Gate City. Anril II.

Every editor In Iowa VINO mas re-
ferred to that post leadership matter,
at all. the editor of the Haick- Eye in
eluded, has shown a confidence in our
integrity, which we have throughout
our lifetime tried to deserve, We
are none the less grateful for that
confidence and friendship which
prompts Its expression. But some OF
our exchanges are setting up stand
ard ofvirtue which we do not pretend
to, and we want to say SO right now,
lest we should fall into sham and fin
iea!ness, pretense and cant, about the
matter Of money getting. And we
could not excuse ourself to ourself II
we let any defense of Integrity pro-
ceel upon false grounds. For ip-
stance, the Davenport Gazette has a
kind and generous paragraph COM
mencing thus,
"The Keokuk Gate CITY gives q
characteristically explicit and honest
refutation, from the pen of its editor,
S. NJ. Clark, Esq, to a roorback start
ed by Washington correspondent OF
the Burlington Haspl- Eye. This sto-
nv was to the effect that tho editor OF
the Gate CITY had procured and been
interested in post leadership held
by his brother. The sole 'founa aation
for the statement lay in the fact that
the brother in question was appoint
ed as post trader on the rccommen-
datiod Of prominent men in Califor-
mia, among whom he had long lived,
and wha knew him well as q thor
oughly honest and reliable man, etc"
We should not have noticed either
the facts or falsehoods of the corres-
pondent's statements had they fallen
| simply within the limits of the Ga
zette's statement. We referred to the
matter because every assertion of the
correspondent, save as stated by US
was a falschood, and every statement
made by us in relation thereto, was
the truth. But we certainly did mo-
mean to convey that Wo had nothins
t6 do with getting his appointment
for we did. We had not PERSONAL!
! met our brother for MANY years
and the explicit Communications Of hi
neighbors in California, who hat
known him in that time, confirmed
our recommendation that he was Il
man for the appointment he got, w
certainly desired that it might prov,
that both he and VIC should make le
gitimate profit out of the business
The result turned out as we hav,
heretofore stated, but we should hav
| been very glad to have had the resul
, different for both ofus. We shonl'
, have been very glad il he and W
could have Malle honestly q Forum
out of tho business, but we don
: think either he or we wanted to max
. q dollar that shouldn't he honestl
got. We certainly thought and thin
: there was aud is no more iMprOpriG
: ty, or less credit, or less honesty in a
!. appointment coming from the Secrt
4 tary of War than from the Presiden
1. or any other department of the 60!
ernsnent, or ffOm Tho people. Gel
i tainIy this particular appointmeI
IS was got as fairly and saqafely rs an
J. kind Of an appointment ever wa
4 Then, too, il isn't an ptiiiei II rs
:, mere privilege Of doing certain bu
u mess at soldier post; the appointe
e, taking the same business risks thel
Il as anywhere If he makes, all right,
he loses, It's his own affair, AS
plundoring the soldiers, II he is a
I honest man he wont do. it; an
u whether honest or dishonest, he cal
le not plunder them Ii the officers d
It their duty. Ii we could afford it v
A. would think it Just as legitimate to !
III interested in that business as al
s. other. But, after our brothers 9.
X perience, we thipk we would pref
ne being interested in most any 9th
G. business to that. Rnt we dbM't wa
anybody to think that we are SO vi
r tuous that we won't honestly maj
c. money whenever and wherever '
1t can. Ii post trading when honest
- got and honestly conducted isn't q
" gitimate and honest business, thu
y Congress and the Government shou
labolish the whole thing.