Clearfield Republican. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1851-1937, 1876-06-28

Ityo, mi, a,a .,, oonc,, Il, ,
o,,i, ,ta, e "u w., "y ',o, ,'an' ,ha m III, III
La,n II % No. ea, W" .,'" Ivy VIZ, Ky Ky W., W."
,."n, u " ,o t ha an"", ev % ,.,,, ,a,' un "v' ,,'
wclcomo ~ !, ~ .,or WA had ,snI ,vr "'', %
romarl,s on ,ho I'm vhsn / o,,sred @ H., y
amnndment that was agrood m no ,ho
lumbermen Won could ono,e ,som i,
I believe / then said oyerv nerson wns
tired of This ouestion and lint II wa.
nm annual annoyance and n rcnroach
did not condcsccnd to notice the
specch of l,rmcntrout-wh;ch he Ind
carefully writton-at the time he rcud
it, llo prepared il in malice and read
II in desperation, after every legitimate
effort had ihlled to confirm the charge
against me and to sustain the testi.
mony of Andro-all Of which was done
with the maIgnancy with which the
pair wrote the letter of the 2Ist inst.
The contempt with which Ermentrout's
attempt was received by the Senate, Is
only cqualod by the contempt the
effort made to ruin my reputation has
been received by our people when they
read the Betts(y)-W WilsonSchoonover
letter. An old man like Andre may
be duped, and his conscience may be
somewhat eascd by the slime and saliva
covering put on by Ermentrout but
you can not dupe 40 intelligent CON
sttuency MS have had the honor of
representing. They regard your low
insinuations as base and cowardly, and
insist that you shall make them good,
or accept the odium that attaches to all
slandcrcrs Of your class.
Tho quotation from Meigs is hardly
worth noticing, only to show the des-
peratc strait to which my enemies are
driven to find anything against me.
Besides, something awful might hap
pen the astute and learIicd compiler
and apcr Of other men If failed TO
notice this wonderful coincidence.
quoted Mcigs from memory, and
tried to quote Ms near correct as !
could, bu. find by the showing in the
paper that ! did Meigs injustice, for
which apologize TO the spiritof Meigs.
believe that put the necessary quota
ton marks to the manuscript, but may
have forgotten il. If so, il is oil the
same for the Meigs letters are copy.
righted, and no one, except one OF
Meigs' representatives, can call me TO
an account for il. But If | had been
"Schooney," ! would not have signed
the letter unless that part was stricken
out tor il don't look well. But, per-
haps, he did not read it doubt if he
could in writing. Poor dupe
will not weary the public by re
hearsing the evidence in the reports
Of two committees, who had this mat
ter almost exclusively under investiga-
ton, the one absolutely so, The first
says that some evidence was taken
that may be considered as in some
sense corroborative Of the respective
statements but, as II is only corrobora-
tive to the fact of an interview or con
versation with Andre, which is not de
Mod by me, and in part to other ques-
tions (of course not connected with the
bilD, the committe says il may, or it
may not, be considered as evidence.
Now, will any sane man believe that
Strang, high-toned, but ardent Re
publican; Dunkle and Lawrence, equal
ly honorablcand reprcson tative Repub-
licans, or that Dill, who is well and
favorably known to many Of our peo-
pie, would lend their names and risk
their regulations on a doubtful report,
if any real facts had been elected? Or
that Allen, who was the local champion
Of the boom bill, wonld permit doubt
fnl report TO be made against his inter
ests ! say his interests, for be 1t re-
mcmbered, while the committee was
at work, the evidence had accumulated
that the lnmbermen had made specific
offers of money to secure votes for the
passage of the bill. Under this state
Of facts, 1t is not likely that Mr.. Allen,
who is one of the best lawyers in the
Senate,and avery honorable man, would
haveprotected me, i'll had been against
him, or rguilty OF the charge OF attempt
ing TO bribc men tovote against the bili.
The committee apDOintcd in pursuancc