The Somerset herald. [volume] (Somerset, Pa.) 1870-1936, 1882-10-18

Two OF A kIND.-It's full of 'em and our
time is too precious and space too valuable
to expose them all, but We give the follow
ing samples, taken from the last issue of the
Meyersdale Commercial:
Brakeman Kline, who was So Sc
riously injured in collision on the
Baltimore x Ohio Railroad, near Pitts
burgh on Thursday of last week is son of
Charles Kline, for many years the pressman
of the HERALD, who was discharged last
year for voting for Hon. VIM. J. Baer for
Judge and John J. Spangler for Sheriff"
The above is silly, willful lie, manufac-
tured out of the whole cloth. The editor OF
the HERALD voted for Sheriff Spangler, as
did every one connected with this Office.
Mr.. Kline was never discharged by US, but
voluntarily left our employ three months after
both Sheriff Spangler and Judge Baer were
elected Mr. Kline called at the HERALD
office Saturday morning to refuie the Com
alacidfs lie ana said in substance what we
have just stated.
Again, in reply to an article which APP
peared in the HERALD stating that Martin V
Sorber had been mustered in as a member of
the Somerset post of the G. A. K at spe-
ciaily called meeting, and that although the
Post had been in existence Tor a long time,
he had never expressed a desire 70 join II
until he became the Independent candidate
for the legislature the same paper says:
We charge this as "a base lie. Capt. Sor-
Der had applied for admission to the Post
before he OF anybody else knew he would be
candidate Let Mr., Scull retract his base
! lie against the gallant soldier or we will be
| forced 10 show by members of the Post that
he lies
We made our statement upon the author
! ity of several members of X. F. Cummins
Post of the G. \. r., whose merest word
would be taken by everybody before the
oath of the editor Of the Commercial or the
poor, miserable, pitiful fellow who made a
like denial at the independent meeting at
the Weller school house, and upon the same
authority We re-iterate the assertion and cali
for the afiidavits that will establish the con
trary. Let's have the aifidayits.
The following is taken from the Phiisdel-
phia North Amcnicua, of which paper Mr..
William McMichael. Independent candidate
for Congress man at Large i one of the
editors
"Adiectives are likely enough 10 lose
their significance Jn the lips of political
speakers. When we read that General
hoontz made one Of the most forcibie
speeches OF the campaign FOR the Stewart
ticket al DOylestown. it Is natural 10 expect
that one or more OF the fUrcible" argu-
ments offered on that occasion would be re-
ported with the fact. But in the brief report
| of what the speaker said We find but single
point that can be considered :" forcible. and
which was given beyond doubt TO illustrate
the force OF speech. General koontZ SAID
that there had not been q Republican con-
vent;On for fifteen years the nominees of
which had been the choice OF the people
| We are To understand then that unless the
persons nominated by a convention have
been indicated by popular choice, the action
of the convention Is arbitrary. dlctatorlal,
and Of the machine order.
But how often in fact are the nominations
of a convention indicated by any general
| and concerted action of the masses? In or
der that nominations may be indicated by
the people, il will become necessary for the
people in every election district TO meet and
instruct for certain persons. But when they
attempt to do that. We shall be informed
popular action, and the act Of the people
would be declared tainted with bOsssm.
Nobody can saw that the nomination OF
James \. Garfield was indicated by the peo-
pie in any sense whatever If the people
indicated anybody. it was Mr Blaine. But
we DO not learn that General Kooniz made
this fact an excuse for opposing Garfield
In fact We suppose he worked for the cleo
ton of Garfield, despite the fact that not one
man in the United States had seriously ex-
pressed his preference for Garfield
We find no fault with the preferences of
General koontz. We arraign his methods
Tie does not impress u a. being sincere in
his forcible' arguments. For had he and
Others objected TO a nominee of the conven-
ton that that nominee was not indicated by
: the people, they could not have worked so
earnestly for the election of Garfield. But
this does not 90 to the bottom Of the mat
ter. Because neither General Koontz nor
any other man working for the Stewart
ticket viii presume to say that Mr. Stewart
r was indicated to that convention bv the Re
pubiicans of Pennsylvania. In fact they
know that nothing of the kind was indica-
ted by the people. If there is any force in
the argument OF General koontz. il discredits
! the nomination of Mr.. Stewart. His argu-
ment is Of the kind that proves too much.
II leaves him without a cause. Tn the
other hand We must say. as we have inya-
riably said prior TO aud since the nomina-
? tion of General Beaver, that if the people
indicated choice for ANYBODY. thev indi-
Gated choice for General Beaver General
koolltz NAV have other reasons for refusing
: 70 support General Beaver As we suppose he
: has. but the reason given certainly cuts him
off from advocating Mr. Stewart before the
people"