The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1879-03-20
THE ALLIANCE REVIEW TO THE
REPOSITORY AGAIN.


II our charge of demagogism against
the Repository, in its course on the com
promise bill, we're lacking In justification
surely 1t lacks It no longer. In it's issue
of Monday it publishes our article, but
offers not one word OF defense or expla.
nation for the very equivoCal course 1t
has taken in this matter. 1t only tries
to avoid the issue by dodging behind it's
favorite scareCrow, "McGregor. We
ask it for some reason for its opposition
to the bill-it only gasps, "McGregor |"
We call upon it to furnish the public
with any new light upon the subject,
which 1t may have attained, but the re-
ply is-"AcGregOr !" We ask it to ex.
plain its treachery to the Press of the
county, but the only answer we can get
is-" McGrsgOri" McGREGoR "Mo.
GREG0Rl" The Repository seems to
be suffering from some horrible night
mare, in which McGregor appears to be
the presiding imp, punching up his hap
less victim, occasionally, with a red-hot
poker, and driving him frantic with ter
ror. McGregor, tits true, might not be
termed handsome man, in the strict
sense of the word, but we can assure
our neighbors of the Repository he is
not so dangerous as he looks, and if they
will only stop yelling long enough to ex-
plain, We'll try to keep McGregor off long
enough for them to do 80.
Mr.. 7. W. Saxton does not attempt to
deny that he was one of the prime mo-
vers in this compromise bill; that he
plead its cause before the other editors
of the county, and secured their support
of the measure; that he sent letter to
our Representatives in the Legislature,
urging them to use their influence in be.
half of the bill, and pledging the Repos-
itory to it's support. Within three weeks
time we find him bowling against the
bill, and denouncing its supporters in un-
measured terms, Yet, up to this hour
he has not offered one word of explana-
ton for his course. Does the Repository
suppose the intelligent citizens of Stark
county will accept his personal allusions
to McGregor, as argument against meas
ule which involves such i'm portant fnan-
cial interestsP What the taxpayers want
to know is, the shortest and sureSt method
Of recovering the largest amount of the
lost money, Is it good reason why
they should oppose the measure because
McGregor happens to favor it? And yet |
this is the only argument which the Re
pository has ever offered against the bill.
We feel hattered that our modest little
editorial of last week should have been
esteemed of 80 much importance, that
our neighbor should attribute its authen-
ITCHY to the highly cultured literary
lights of the city of Canton. We knew |
it was good and wise when we wrote it,
That's the kind of editorial the Review
INDUCES in, and we have piles of them
on hand yet which we will continue to
hand out for the deleCtation of our Re.
pository neighbors.
We wish to say to the Repository that |
we never tried to play second fiddle but
once, and that was when we put faith in
Bro. Saxton's view on the compromise
bill, and the result was disastrous Tom.
turned his tune too quick for us to follow. |
But feeling assured that we are on the
right key, we'll continue to play it, or
bust the fiddle.