Ashtabula weekly telegraph. (Ashtabula, Ohio) 1880-1886, 1880-08-20
ALIe Ernosed.

responsibility for one Democratic lie.
In number and meanness the Demo-
cratic lies of this campaign have been
remarkable, but one of the basest of
them has been brought home to a re-
| sponsible source. Some days ago the
| New York World stated, with much dis
play, that Justice Swayne, in decision
rendered in 1875 by the United States
| Supreme Court, had characterized an
| employment of General Garfield to act
as temporary counsel for paving COM
pany as ga sale Of official influence
which no veil can cover" 1t turns out
that Justice Swayne never used any
such language in respect to General
| Garfield, in the case professedly cited
nor in any other; that the matter was
never before him or the Supreme Court;
and that Justice Swayne publicly ex-
presses, in a most emphatic manner,
the very highest respect for the candi-
date whom he was said to have Judi
cially branded as guilty Of ga sale of
official influence" The untruth was
Immediately exposed by Justice
Swayne himself, and by the distin-
guished Democrat, ex-senator Doolittle,
who was counsel against the paving
company, but who felt that in self-re-
spect he could not see so gross a false
hood circulated without contradiction,
and therefore stated, in a published
card, that the case was never before
| Justice Swayne nor the Supreme Court.
There has been ample time for the
| World to retract the falsehood thus ex-
posed, and to make the apology which
a decent self-respect would have
prompted. Instead, it has resorted to
| dishonest evasions which match the
original forgery in shameless infamy.
| When Senator Doolittle's card APP
| peared, the World pretended that the
only question was whether Justice
Swayne had used the language quoted,
in reference to General Garfield, in the
precise case named by the World or in
some other case. The original asser-
! tion might have been thought an error,
but this, in view of Mr. DOolittle's ex-
| plicit statement, was a deliberate falsi-
ticatiOn. When Justice Swayne indig-
nantly denied the story, the World
raised n doubt as to the veracity of the
| report of his language, and a doubt as
to his veracity in asserting that he had
never made any such statement as was
| quoted with respect to General Garfield,
whom he highly respected. When it
was fully proved that the words quoted
were taken, not from any decision of
any Judge, but from an argument of
counsel, the World then deliberately
| lied again, in asserting that the Ian
guage had been used by Justice Swayne
in a matter precisely parallel to that of
! General Garfield These dishonest eva
siOns, these shameful atempts to keep
alive lie after its utter untruth had
been exposed, put the World precisely
on level, rs to honor or veracity, with
the man who originally invented the
malignant falsehoOd.
The Democratic party appears to find
extraordinary difficulty in this cam
| paign. In no other contest for many
years has the Democratic fertility of
Justification been 50 reoklessly indulged.
Clear-headed Democrats see that this
wild riot of mendacity is hurting the
party, and a Democratic journal at the
West observes that 'the fool-killer'
would do great service to the Democ-
racy if he would extermnate the men
who set on foot such falsehoods as those
about Justice Swayne and the intention
of General Grant to support General
Hancock. OF course the party would
gain more votes if it would rely less
upon lies. But the matter ought to be
considered on plane much higher than
that of political expediency. 1t is hurt
full to party to resort to dishonest and
scandalous statements; but it is also dis
graceful to the country that Presiden-
tial election should not be conducted
without degrading editors aud orators
by the score, who hold positions which
gentlemen only are fit to fill, to the
level OF the basest blackguards. In
both parties there ought to be man
hood enough to put down any creature
whose behavior tends to dishonor Amer
lean citizenship. By decent men of all
parties the use of deliberate lies about
an opponent ought to be resented as u
personal insult.
The Democratic party will not gain
anything by its personal attacks upon
the Republican candidate Able and
eager opponents have for years made
the most of every possible accusation
against him in successive campaigns in
Ohio and have given it up as n bad job.
His supporters are not alarmed when
they see the time and strength of Dem
ocrats wasted in the same futile attacks.
This latest falsehood, so easily and eff
tectually nailed to the counter, will go
far to make people cautious about cred
iting others, In the end, that party
will command public confidence which
respects itself, and treats with respect
and honesty those whose votes 1t asks.
1t is to the credit of the Republican
party that it has not degraded itself
nor insulted the public by resorting to
any personal ISLANDERS about General
Hancock. His shrewdest supporters
know that fewinfamous performances
like that of the World will go far to dis
gust people with a party which can
find no better weapon than falsehood.
N y Tribune.