Daily Republican. [volume] ([Wilmington, Del.]) 1874-1890, 1879-02-03
fROM our CAPITAL.
The Republican Correspondent ON
HE Defenec-Whst Mc Asserts
and what Ne Denies.

and what Ne Denies.
Special Correspondence OF the Republican.
DOVER, DEL, Feb. 3rd, '79.
Following the publication of the ar
ticle in Thursdays issue, revealing the
proceedings which attended the legisla-
tiv. wine drinking, held at this place
on Tuesday evening last, there came
forth general howl Of Indignation from
those who participated. In open legis-
lative session the article was read and
commented upon, and as a matter OF
course the writer was condemned as be
ing exaggerative, and one in whom the
first principles Of truthfulness had no
existence. An attempt was made to
crawl from beneath it, but the effort be-
| ing an abortive one, only made the
fac, clearly apparent that the half had
not b. en- told. On the par; of some Of
the members Of the House there was a
manifest desire to seek revenge by
bringing the matter before the consid.
Grafton of that honorable body in the
shape of resolution expelling your
correspondent from the chamber. Wiser
counsels prevailed however and the
resolution, although written, was not in
troduced.
As to tn. article, in our own defence
We have but to say that it was truth
ful. There were no personalities or
any alluSions by which any one of the
participants would be eliminated used
The righteousness Of the affair as a mem
ber termed it, was based upon facts,
facts which are known to all, and COM
mented upon by every mora! minded
citizens here, as being a disgrace, not
only upon the body politically, but a
shame to the people whom the partici-
pants represent. The Democratic press
took up the matter, and with its usual
short sightedness, endeavored to bolster
up the members in their weak efforts
to wriggle out Of an unpleasant dilem'
ma. The Delauarean boldly asserted
that there were no evidences of intOxi-
cation only among a few who were self
invited such, as the editor asserted, as
was the REPUBLICAN, correspondent. In
denial Of this your correspondent would
state, that he was only present but
few minutes, and those few minutes
formed the interim between the en-
trance Of the banquetters to the serving
of the champaign. AT this point he
left.
He was not selt.invited as the Dela-
warean asserts, for he had been asked
to call over by one of the officials who
gave the supper. He didn't accept and
consequently lie didn't feel at. liberty
to stay. The reason why the invitation
wasn't accepted is this For some time
the supper was talked Of as a private
affair, and something which the repor-
ters were to know nothing Of
The managers rightly copjectured
that if supper was given there would
be a general drunk, and whatever its
effects they must be kept from the pub
lie. In oeder to do this they thought
it would be best to exclude press rep
resentatives. For some unexplained
reason, at the eleventh hour, the minds
of the managers of the affair suddenly
changed, and, doubtless thinking that
it would serve their purpose better to
buy over the reporters, they were in
formally invited. Not wishing to put
aside principle and demean himself
by becoming party to such trans
action, is the reason why the Repub-
lican was not represented. And as to
the further charge Of your correspond
ent being present and being so intoxi'
Gated, as not to be able to distinguish
who was drunk, preferred blythe Dela'
warean, the above will suffice for none
cannot but acknowledge the physca
impossibility OF such thing. Had the
editor of that paper been as far remov-
ed from the allurements OF that dining
room as was the REPUBLICAN, correspond.
ent, it would have been more conducive
to that gentleman moral status.
The Ga-eue of your city, also goes of
into hysterical, denunciation OF yeur
correspondents revelations and init.
mates that he was actuated by desire
to make political capital. In Ian
suage emphatic the editor boots at the
idea that Governor Hall and Judge
Houston would lend their presence tc
such ungraceful proceedings as were de.
piclei. Notwithstanding the 'Gazette's
hasty assumption the two gentlemen
above named were present. Whether
they lent their presence Of their tree
will or We're inveigled into the cou,
panionship with those assemblymrn,
we are not prepared to say. From the
character OF the editors leader We pre-.
sumo that the information upon which
he bases his remarks came from the
paragraph sent him by his Dover cor
respondent coudenlning our article as
being "tissue of lies
The little misguided fellow who oc.
cupies the position as correspondent fol
the "Gazet.e," in his desire to shield
his fellow bacchanals from public dis.
appreciation, overshot the mark and
laid himself open to attack. We, how.
ever, look pityingly upon his weakness
and having his word that his indiscre
ton will not be repeated, We retrail
from exposing his misdoings.
4 1. i a. n