Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1882-02-13
larlrasts: Elltelliqenrer.
MONDAY EVENING. FEB. la, 1882.
Got the Wrong Pig by the Ear.

Got the Wrong Pig by the Ear.
1t has been just about seven years
since Republican official in this city,
goaded on by a newspaper of his party,
indiscreetly brought libel suit against
the INTELLIGENCER, from the conse-
quences of which he was glad to escape
by preventing US from establishing be-
fore jury the truth Of our accusations
against him. Some five years later the
editors of this journal were again hailed
before a civil tribunal to answer for
having indulged in criticism upon the
failure of tie court to take cOgnlzance
of an imposition practiced upon
it 10y officials who had betray-
ed its confidence. In this case, as
we'll as in the other, the ISTELLIHEN-
GERS course was vindicated This jour
nal has neither sought nor Stunned legal
responsibility for its criticism upon pub
lie officials. 1t has not cOurted the no.
toriety of libel suits neither has it been
swerveI one inch from what it be-
lieves to be its duty to the public
by any threats of such prosecutions
from those whom it criticiseS in pur
suance of its obligation to the public. 1t
endeavors ut all times to perform its
duty in accordance with the dictates of
its publishers cOnscienceS, and with 4
careful regard for the rights and privi-
leges OF new >paper> rs guaranteed or
limited by the law of the land. More
than these it does not ask. and to less
than these it will not he limited by any
cOnSiaerat ions comilictin" with It's pull
lie duty.
1t is vastly of more concern to the IN
TELLIGENCER and every other respect.
able newspaper 10 do justice To Itself by
publishing the truth and correcting any
errors into which it may fall, than to
avoid libel suits or dodge their consr-
quences When therefore the lNTELL,
GENCER is accused of miSreprcSent
ing anybody it diligently sets itself to
inquire into the proof of the accusation
and publishe, its results regardless Of
whether libel suits are brought or not .
and equally regardless of whether, ii
brought, they are prosecuted or ahan
doned.
Last Thursday there appeared in the
local columns OF this paper Il con,nuni-
cation from Il reliable and lisinlerestel
gentleman Of this city, the pirport oi
which was that prison inspector had
bought pigs for the prison at two dollars
4 head more than he had been author
lied to pay for them, and three dollars :,
head more than he himself had sold like
piga iur and the inference in which Wa,
that lr had sold four nf his own ri.:S
and two bought from some one else ia
the county at three dollars more than :.
fair market price, making profit for
himself of eighteen dollars. For Tho.
publication of this communication the.
INTELL,GENCER has been violently a.
sailed in the Etanttr,r'S editorial col
umnS--by some one who has obtained
permission to usc that dumping grolln,!
for " shameless libel, evidently
tile product of partisan reckl-ssness and
personal hatred 80 Il base ami malicious
attack all leading the writer to the
melancholy reflection that civilization
may be Il failure and that the newspaper
-Erantntr included perhaps-is about
''to become d curse instead of Il blessing
t. society"
We do not know whether MIR. Calvin
Carter has sued the elNTELLIGEN,Ei: for
libel or not. We do not care. We pro-
pose to say nothing more OK less
if he has not ur will not do 20
than we would Say if he has done St, oi
proposes to do SO. In justice to oui
selves us well as t" Mr.. Carter, we have
inquired carefully is to the truth Of the
facts and inferelce& OF our correspond
ent, which We're published neither laa
liciollsl, nor negligently by him or b.
us, but in good faith, Tor proper public
information and after Liligent inquiry
This investigation, the result of which
is elsewhere given. mas convinced us that
Mr.. Kaufman vas mistaken in Suppos
ing that the shoats seen at the prison
were the ShOatS he saw and left at Car
tiers, and the inference that Carter
had sold his pigs - the prison was un
fair to Mr.. Carter and unwarranteu 10y
the real facts OF the case nor is there
any reason to believe that Mr.. Carter
personally proIted in the purchase by
him from other parties of pigs for the
prison.
In making this correction we desire to
do Nj. Carter even and exact justice :;
but we neither impugn the good faith of
our correspondent, WHO based his infer
ence On Mr.. Kauttman's statement nor
on Mr.. Kaufman, though they We're
obviously mistaken. That mistake it
was easy to make in view of the remark
ble resemblance between the prison pigs
and Carter's pigs and in view of Car
ter's statements to Kaufman that the
pigs in his pen he had - for the prison"
The investigation has not shown why
Mr.. Carter paid 81 for pigs for the prison
that are no better than those which he
sold to a neighbor for 81; nor why he
exceeded his authority and paid $: Il
head more than the resolution of the
board directed.
Beyond this, Mr.. Carter's private char
acter or his official conduct or any mat
ter referring to his or any other iEspec-
tor,s rolat ions tn tho nriSOn manaramant