Lexington weekly intelligencer. (Lexington, Mo.) 1871-1887, 1882-08-12
MIR. DEFENSE.

McEadden, ana we tnplk tnat We nav
proven it 10 him in the past. We do
not feel unkindly to-him even now.
Ii we have for three weeks poured
out "vials of wrath" upon his head,
we have accorded him else where, as
much space as we occupied in the
three issues 20 pour out the walls of
his wrath, not only upon our head,
but upon that Of u gentleman III all
educational matters his superior, who
was not 8 party to this controversy,
aud whose name motives of propriety,
which should have been evident to
the most obtuse, should have spared.
Mr.. McFadden ends his letter by
implied reproach at our having spoken
of him as an invalid. He will not
pretend to think that we have re-
preached him for this, have ridiculed
him for it, or have not proper gym
pathy for affection. His complaint is
q bid for sympathy. Our alIusion
meant neither ridicuie or lack OF
feeling, but simply. that having been
elected out of sympathy, despite his
partial i~ncapacity by reason OF sick
ness. that he might have tho little
emoluments of the place, waving for
his sake the right of the public to
pHblic meetings of the board. he was
the last man. who should have been
careless and defiant of popular senti-
ment. We think 30 still.
We have never desired to intimate
that we could not be answered. We
have. unlike part of the school board,
lived to sufficient purpose to learn
that we may be mistaken, but we
submit that we are still wered.
aud that while u friend travels a
column of non pariel type around
Robin Hoods barn he nowhere touch
es the ground of our complaint. The
argument about displacement" is
simply puerile, out of respect for MI.
McFadden we will refrain from call
ing it nenseusical. Everybody knows
that the teacher wal to be elected, aud
everybody knows, too, that Mr. Cat
ron would not have accepted the
school for one year. That he was led
to believe he would have it SO long
as he gave Satisfaction, and that be
did;give satisfaction, no one denies.
1t would have been much more man
ly in u old friend If he had let his
intention to vote for Mr.. Clark be
known before the spring electionl(he
entertained it. it seems). than 10 con-
ceal 1t sslike q worm i the bud" to
poison the taste of those who voted
for him, but desired to retain Mr..
Cstron. Among many others we
were of the number, but had we
known this when he told us that he
had a particular reason for desiring
to be re rejected we certainly should
not have been. We were not told;
neither were the others. CAN it be
that a little over u year ago Mr.. Nc.
Faddeu voted for Mr.. Cstron with a
view to the election this spring? II
looks a little that way.
w have never denied the right or
the propriety of the boards getting
teachers from abroad when it. is for
the interest OF the schools to do so,
while we are in favor always, all
things being equal, of employing
home TALENT. SO we need not furthtr
notice the point regarding our recon-
meudation of applicants for places.
The complaint of the Iutelligen-
Ger Is this: That as we'll as
it could be done, under the
surreptitious way in which the matter
was conducted by the board, the peo-
Pile sought to protest against the re-
moval Of Mr.. Catron, whom they had
been led to believe would be retained,
aud that the board took 10 notice of
their desires. This ia the point OF
their offending. Mr.. McFadden is
careful not to touch upon it. The
election OF Mr.. Clark, this year, il
not the every same thing" that it was
two years ago. Then there were two
factions among the taxpayers. and q
new teacher had to be elected. This
tiIae there was universal public ap.
prevail Of the gentleman who had
taught the previous year.
Mr.. McFadden says. almost az
forcibly as when he threatened some
Que with u poker, "any one who haa,
or may say that refused 10 see any
patrons of the school in connection
with Mr.. Catron's election, or will
any other matter with which l have
been officially connected during my
life tells that which is absolutely uu,
true" aud arraigns us for publishing
such o statement. We submit thai
this is fighting a man of straw. w,
never printed any such thing. VIVA
we did say was this:-"Onc Of tn,
gentlemen. who is an Invalid, and wht
has been treated with much consider
alton by the people of the district
when told that some of the patron,
of the school desired to speak Il hin
on the subject. had the effrontcrv t.
reply that it was of no use, that b.
had made up his mind, aud that i
would make 10 difference" Thi
language was reported TO US ant
others by Mr.. Catron. immediatel!
from the presence of Mr.. McFadden
1t may seem to the latter gentleman
a civil II wer for a public servant t,
send to the people when they 81 Elk I,
speak to him on their W business
To gsit app ,ars HI exceedingly i:npu
dent one, as very few persons havin;
selt-respect you'd care to subjec
themselves to a repetition o! the rebuff
Beside. how could he PREJUDICE VIVA
they hal TO say. aud The inluenc
which ii should have on his mind 7
We indulge in no ~innueudues. wha
/ n lnk.N tn nhNy nv nrt ls1 -