Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1878-06-13
The Dilemma.

: The ancient logicia1s were s0rely
puzzled over logical paradox, which
they called pse,sdonae'aos, or "the liar. I"
1t runs thus: A certain Cretan says
that the Cretans are all liars. Now, if
he speaks truly the Cretans are all IL
ars; and he, being a Crefan, Is, OF
course, liar. Then, since he is liar,
the Cretans are not all liars, and he
has not spoken truly. 4a
We have.no disposition to study our
selves to death over this paradox, as a
certain Greek logician is said to have
done. 1t is sufficient solution OF the
dilemma that one of the Cretans is a
liar by his own showing; and If all the
Cretans are to be proven liars, it must
be shown bya more reliable witness
than this wholesale slanderer Of his
countrymen. m 1.i.-4r, -sa--
Precisely the same paradox is puz-
zling an eminent logiciaD of to-day.
A certain Louisiana election officer
testifies that the Louisiana election Of
ficers-himself included-are all liars.
Potter is inclined to believe that this
man speaks truly; but how can it be,
since the testimony itself proves that
the witness lies? "But," says Potter,
"this must be true, for the witness
swears to it." Certainly; he swears
now that in 1876 he sworea to election
returns which he knew TO be false.
II he lies now, his testimony then was
true. If his present testimony is true,
he certified to lie then. Which horn
do you take9 Yet our Democratic
brethren are 10th to give 1t up. They
point us to the documents which the
witness offers in evidence. Are they
properly certified to, may we ask?
They surely ought to be, to give them
strength; for, you know,the documents
of '76, viz: the fraudulent election re-
turns, were duly certified according to
law. We advise Potter and his COM
mittee TO accept the only legitimate
conclusion to which the testimony
leads: that is, that the testimony itself
is perfectly worthless; and that it Is
very poor material with which to
'svindicate the nations honor.v
But this great investigator is involv-
ed in still more serious dilemma.
Mr.. Potter is a statemen; let us be-
lieve that he is wise one, and up;
q oesk ha
us to believe. The most obvious and
foresight. Had not Mr.. Potter fore.
sight enough to see that the testimony
upon which he must depend to estab
lish the conclusions at which he wish
es to arrive, must, in the nature of the
case, be perfectly worthless, and worse
than worthless? With the iuvestiga.
tions Of '76 before him, what could he
reasonably expect to bring out that
would make anybody wiser or better?
A wise states man should have fore
seen the interminable mass of perjury
and recrimination to which this inVes-
figation must lead. A wise statesman
must also have foreseen the unsatisfac-
tory results, not to say confusion,
which must follow. - i' ''
Let us copcede that Mr.. Potter did
foresee this, as he certainly must. l.
it, then the part OF an upright states
man to squander the peoples money
in investigations, which must food the
country with a literature of fraud and
falsehood, and lead to no other results
than thes-? These cannot be the re.
suits which he is seeking. Then what
does he expect to do? Observe the
plan: Republican frauds in, Louisiana
and Florida are to be Investigated, but
not Democratic frauds in Oregon, Mis-
sissippi and other States. Does it not
look as If the whole scheme were for
political effect? But this upright
statesman, in favor OF economy and re-
trenchme Mt, could not take such dis
honorable course as to make use OF
public money for party purposes; to be
pretending 10 ''vindIcate the natiOnsl
honor" by uncovering such q mass of
political filth and corruption as must
= make any nation disgrace among the
nations of the earfh- -ase8 le .1lliiil
One of twnl conclusions Is inevitable
-either the author of this scheme was
not wise enough 10 foresee the result OF
this Investigation, or honest enough to
confess their motives. Let them choose
which horn of the dilemma they will
Jake.