Southern standard. (McMinnville, Tenn.) 1879-current, 1880-03-20

You say seem exceedingly anxious to in.
duce somebody to step ON my coat tail. In
this assertion you are far from the truth.
The trouble is you have been on my coat
tail in two instances by willfully missrepre.
senting the STANDARD while it was under
my administration, and thus attempting to
prejudice the public against it in order to
get them to withheld their patronage from
it. The first instance was in your issue of
Jan. 2Sth, where you copy from the STAND
ARD small local item in reference to the
disarmament of the Grange organization in
this county (and which was written by DR..
Paine, former editor of the paper and place
it in juxtaposition with another item (Which
was clipped from an exchange and publish
ed ia the STANDARD which showed the evil
effects upon the Democratic party through.
out the nation, of the demoralizing doctrine
of reputation which you and others were
preaching. You placed them together in
your columns and tried to make the impress
sion that the STANDARD classed the Grang-
ers and regulators in the same category,
when you knew nothing of the kind was in.
tended.
The next time you were on my coat tail
was when you said:
awe presume the STANDARD thinks it all
| right to call the low-taX party 'repudiation-
ists,' dishonest fools, and all manner of
billingsgate," &c.
In this you tried to make the impression
that theSTANDARD, under my administration,
had abused the lQw-tax party, as you call it,
and used such epithets as the above, in ref.
erence to it, when you knew the STANDARD
had done nothing of the kind.
You ask me what mean when | said
"Has the Era become so demoralized with
the infamous doctrine of reputation that il
cannot tolerate the opinions of those who
favor honesty in the discharge of just debts. u
meant this: You had willfully missrep
resented the STANDARD and tried to preiu
dice the public against it until desired to
know if you had become $50 demoralized" by
reputation that you could not allow a word
said in favor of paying honest debts, and
hence asked the question, and you have moi
had the manliness to answer it. 1t depends
upon how you answer the question as t
whether l apply the epithet to you or not
And in case should have to apply it t.
yOu, l, by no means, intend to apply it t.
those you call the "low-tax party" the mos
of whom are honest and are in favor of pay
ing honest debts if not misled by your falls
doctrine.
You say you believe edited high-ta7
State credit paper at Jasper, Tenn, durinl
the 50.4 canvass, and that the CLEVELAND
Banner accused me of being Republican
in disguise. Yes, did edit State eredi
paper (minus the high-tax, which is a misno
mer, and is always stuck in by you to give
false colorng to every body who happens t.
favor honesty in the discharge of public oh
, ligations) there and advocated the 50-4 meas
ure, and when the election came round
didn't turn traitor and vote against it.
The charge of the Banner was made yea
previous to the 50-4 canvass. | denounce,
it as a malicious tdtsehOOd, which was admit
ted by the writer by his failure to produc
the proof to establish the charge. | hav
the same answer to make to you or anybod
else who may wish to repeat the charge.
Now let me say to you, don't 60 int
spasms because dared to come to McMinn
vile and set up another paper-try to coo
off before the dog days come or you nigh
work yourself into bad case of hydrophC
bia and then the whole community would b
. under TIE necessity of guaranteeing agains
you. Respectfully,
, II. p. BAKER.