Butler citizen. [volume] (Butler, Pa.) 1877-1922, 1882-07-26
A TROUBLED SPIRIT

the county could stand it, but he could
not. He should, by this time, have
learned to bear his defeats, and to
weld to the will of the majority, as ex-
pressed at the primaries, with becoming
grace and composure. By kicking,
growing, swapping and complaining
now he only brings the more to public
notice the fact that he feels "hurt, " be-
cause that he was cleft" But it is
the old adage, of "the pig under the
gate that squeals" Ever since the
late Republican primary election he
has been attacking this one or that one.
In the first issue of the paper he con-
trolls it was growl and a complaint
about the Chairman of the County
Committee, Mr. Walker. This was
permitted to be passed without notice.
Then in the next issue, under the pre-
text of making the customary reference
to the nominees of our county, which he
had failed to do the previous week, he
did so in covert, disparaging manCer,
evidently intended to injure them.
Against Mr.. Braham particularly ne
revived the matter of his vote in the
Legislature for Mr.. Grow for United
States Senator, as against Mr.. Oliver,
Cameron's man. In this be forgot en-
tirely that one of the candidates on the
Regular State ticket, which he has at
the head OF the Eagle, did precisely the
same thing that Mr.. Braham did.
William T. Davies, nominee for Lieu
tenant Governor, then in the State
Senate, voted with and like Mr.. Bra
ham on that question all through that
contest. How does the "Senior editor"
of the Eagle reconcile this glaring in
consistency If he is candid and sim
cere, and not bypocritical, as to that
vote, he should add the name of Mr..
Davies to his list of "disorganizers,"
and call upon the people not to "place
premium" on such conduct by voting
for him. But the truth is that ifa vote
of the Republicans Of this county was
now taken on that vote of Mr.. Braham,
and Mr.. Davies as well, it would be
approved by nine-tenths, or more, OF
the party e this county All this,
however, we let pass unnoticed at the
time. Then in the next issue of the
Eagle he revives his charges against
Mr. Walker, Chairman of the County
Committee This also was again per-
mitted to pass, not noticed. Bot final
ly be grows more bold and, instead Of
taking the hint given by our silence,
makes a charge against the "Senior
editor" of this paper The charge is
that in publishing certain recent let
ter Of the Hon. Daniel Agnew we gar
bled" and "distorted"it etc. Without
stopping to correct his idea of "gar-
bling" brief statement will show
how little truth there is in the matter
and how he attempts to make some
thing out of nothing. a
AS is we'll known, Judge Agnew's
name was before the Independent
State Convention, of May "a, for
Governor. Shortly after that Conven-
ton he had occasion to write letter
to the Philadelphia Evening TeIe-
graph, in reply to some criticisms it
had made on his political views. In
this letter he refers, in the introduc-
tory part of it, to former one he
wrote, in 1878, denouncing bossism
and "Hoyt. Cameron & Co. He then
goes on and gives his views of the
present Independent movement aspub-
Ii shed in the CITIZEN week before last.
We never heard Of or saw the full, en-
tire letter, until we saw it in the Eagle
of this place, and circumstances made
us then doubt its being genuine.
However, in few days we saw the
main portion of it going the rounds Of
papers now called Stalwart or Regular,
and about the same time we received
from Thomas V. Cooper. Chairman
of the Regular State Committee, this
same main portion of the letter with
request to publish it. This we did,
taking it from the Greenville, Pa,
Advance Argus, which we preferred,
and which is the same as sent US by
Cooper, except the heading, and the
same as again appeared in the Eagle
last week. Now the whole matter is,
that these two henchmen, Thomas
Cooper and Thomas Robinson don't
seem to understand one another. If
there is any "garbling" in the matter
Tom Cooper is the guilty party, and 10
him we refer the innocent but honest
senior editor of the Eagle. We
have it yet just as Cooper sent it and
it can be seen by any one. 1t is the
same as was generally published, and
we suppose the first or Introductory
part was dropped simply because it
was not the "pith and sense of the
letter." but beause it was mainly
Introductory to what followed. We
had no object or desire TO withhold
any part of it and thought we were
giving what was most desired But
the "Senior editor" OF the Eagle siezes
upon it as an attempt to "garble" and
do Injustice to Judge Agnew. And