Mexico weekly ledger., 1880-05-20

The "Mercury" Slander.
The Paris Mercury continues to
reiterate its unjust calumny upon
Judge Buckner. 1t repeats the charge
that Judge B. is tariff man, and that
he IS hostile to the interests of the
Western producer, and that he has
Eastern supporters for something
we know not what. When challenged
to point to 4 vote, a speech, an act
or word to make good this bold and
shameless charge, nothing daunted in
its purpose of defamation, it still re-
iterates and repeats the impudent SLAM
der. and attempts toprovel by offering
sa its only evidence that he voted with
twenty or thirty anti-taritt Demo-
Gratis that "under the rules of the
House. bill to reduce the duty on
salt, paper. paper pulp, and printers
type. &C., was incorrectly referred to
a committee "to revise and codify
the statutes of the United States,"
and that its proper reference was the
committee of Ways and Means, to
which all other bills touching the rev.
enue have been uniformly referred.
1t Is upon this vote, and this vote
alone, that the Mercury has the un-
blushing hardihood to charge that
Judge Buckner has sold out to the
tariff monopolists, and has proved
himself to be the enemy Of the people
of the West. This vote, which in its
very terms, excludes all consideration
whether the Mercury and other p%-
pers shall pay the same or . less price
for the paper on which they are
printed, and is simply q question
whether the rules made for the gov
ernment of the business Of the House
shall be enforced or not, is the sole
evidence on which the Mercury seeks
to establish the charge, not only OF
Judge Buckner being a tariff man,
but of gross duplicity and double
dealing as the representative of the
no sense effects the question of the
reduction OF the duty on printing pa
per, printing type, &c. 1t neither
decides that the Mercury shall make
u large or small profit on ITS sub
scription, bat is simply the expression
Of the opinion of Judge Burkncr hat
under the rules of the House the
proper reference Of this pet measure
of the Mercury shall be considered
lN the committee which was organ
lZed for the express purpose of con
sidering all measures touching the
revenue. Is it possible that any un
prejudiced mind can doubt that Judg,
Buckner's vote was right? And is il
not evident that this unfounded at
tack on him has been prompted by q,
overwhelming concern for its ow.
pecuniary interest, gross and unpar
donabie ignorance Of the facts, or q,
irresistible passion for misrepresenta
tion and deception But how doe
the Mercury Justify its extraordinar,
course? 1t first assumes that tn
Committee on Ways and Means
, composed now, as heretofore, of tn
first men of the House-had deter
mined not to report any measure O
tariff reform to the House, and tha
this bill, for the especial benefit Q
= printers and newspapers, would b
buried in its graveyard, never to b
rcsurrectcd. Subsequent events hav
, proven that the prophet of the Mer
curry Is lincal descendant of tn
false prophet Mahomet, As the tele
, graph has announced that bill rt
, during the duties on many articles {
consumption, among them paper an
type, &C., has been agreed upon b
this committee, and has been report
E cd to the House. Another assuml
ton of this paragon OF political know
edge is, that the paper and type bill
&c. would have been fayorably 60,
.idcrcd by the committee for "cOdif,
ing the laws which Judge b., b
5 his vote, said, had no iurisdictlo
g over it by the rules Of the Hous,
Y What evidence of this has til
Mercury or anyone else? On
solitary member of that committe
n favored it-and he the introducer {
I it-but there is not the least evidenc
that y majority of that committe
would have attempted to act upon
measure over which they had no pr.
:. tence of jurisdiction, except by
, trick of its author. TO assume tn:
> this committee would have reporte
= it to the House, except to have r,
Il ferred it to its appropriate committe'
under the rules and practice of tn
House, would be to assume that the
G had an interest, not in tariff refor1
q generally, but, like the Mercury
specially in the reduction of printin
paper and printing type. How, als'
II can the Mercury justify itself to i
readers for its baseless attacks an
unjust insinuatioRs against the repr'
a resentative of this district?
Z, FAIR PLAY.