The Wellington enterprise. [volume] (Wellington, Ohio) 1867-188?, 1884-10-08

quantity OF mdJUer anu uVo IlnleS Ino
circulation in your favor. -
Leaving the argument concerning tho
reason and justification OF voting for
the Democratic candidate for prosecu-
ting attorney for another article, OBJ.
serve you now disclaim any purpose to
answer for any one but yourself alone.
You don't answer for Mr.. Nye, or Met
calf, or Webber, or Avery, or Terrlll,
or Hinckley. Allow me to commend
you for this evidence of returning
wisdom and suggest that il you hac
adopted this plan earlier it might have
saved you from falling into errors and
misstatements, contradictions and ab'
surdities which have seriously compro'
missed your reputation as a o,dlawyer,
II not your character as an honest man.
Your answer to the first Of series o
questions which inquiries how many Of
the afiidavits in "A Fair Hearing" you
had written, though not important,
agrees with the facts, as we had been
informed by gentleman who was per-
mitted to read them, that they were al!
in your handwriting and we have nc
further interest in them than to call at
tention to the ridiculous position iu
which they place the parties by reason
of the inconsistencies and contradic-
tions between Terrills affidavit
which you wrote for him, and the one
on which the order for Hinckley's
arrest and return from distant state
was based. rSee article entitled "a
comparison OF Terrell's allidavits.
With the same friendly interest you
have shown in me, If l may suggest tc
so eminent an attorney, would advise
you before entering upon another such
discussion to look up the antecedents
Of the case more carefully, and So
to borrow word from distinguished
counsel, you may save yourself from
the proper suspicion of being "a very
aSS-tute lawyer" who by reason Of lack
Of foresight fails to make the different
parts of his case consistent with each
other. / am entirely willing to enlight.
en- you on the subject Of my editorial
articles. Nothing appearing as editor
ial has been written by anyone bu'
myself until the issue OF September
10th when, by reason Of illness not an
uncommon event with me a'
YOU know-I was unable Ia
write all had intended aud, procuring
an assistant, we went over the whole
scope of che article together, and II
was written by my direction and with
my approval, and every word Of it has
my endorsement | presume this will
be considered sufficiently definite, and
as your delicate reference TO brains
comes in this connection, allow me "a
suggest that II you had employed some
outside party to furnish brains to run
your defense in this campaign, you
would never have published your yer.
sion of. the Hinckley case; you would
never have written Nye's statement in
"a Fair Hearing" No. /, nor Hinck-
ley's affidavit in the same number; in
shorty would never by obstinacy have
provoked this contest, and we should
all have been unitedly and harmoni.
ously supporting the Republican ticket
You and the large party you lead would
not be devoting all your time and ener
gies and money 10 secure the election
OF Democratic attorney who has NJ
more sympathy with Republican prin
ciples than have Cleveland or Hen
bricks, and who is, by circulating ant
preaching the regular Democratic cam
paign ISLANDERS against Blaine, trying
to insure his defeat. That you shoulC
be working with all your power Il
elect such a man, when but shor
time since you were proclaiming tina
you "would vote for the meanest Re
publican in preference to the most hon
orable Democrat that ever lived" i
passing strange, without excuse, withou
justification and an act which l an
sure you will hereafter deeply regret.
Our second question Is as follows
"Was the five hundred dollars pait
to Mr.. Terril without having n
arrangement, or at least an under
standing with Mr.. Nye that the crimi
nal case was MOTTO be prosecuted.
10 this you devote one-third Of q col
umn, the point Of which Is in the fol
lowing paragraph:
"At the time OF this arrangement
had become convinced that Mr.. Hinck
ley could not be convicted, and was il
favor of showing the war front, ant
that alone, 10 the enemy, and thinl
Mr.. Nye was convinced Of the sam
thing. But he was not willing TO aban
don prosecution in respect to which 81
much cost had been made without tn
most conclusive reasons for so doing
and when he made up his mind that ]
must be abandoned he exerted himsel
TO the utmost TO prevent loss to tn,
public from an occurrence he deemed
Hinckley morally responsible for
though he became satisfied he could no
be held criminally liable. He therefor,
insisted as an ultimatum that all cost
incurred by the county should be paiC
or secured before he would cease hi
efforts TO convict him."
You say in the first number Of YOU
paper: ~ believed at the time and nov
believe she was innocent OF any wrong
/ believed at the time and now belieY,
that her best vindication would be tn,
'cquittal Of the defendant" Mr.. Nyt
"a made TO say in the statement YOU
wrot. for him and published In the
s.me ma, ,er. "the Hinckley prosecution
was aband,,' ned simply and solely be-
cause the won, an said to have been in.
iured refused ~ testify against him,
and on the earnest solicitation Of her
father and friends" Mr.. Nye and you
both agree that there was no case
....,,,at tI;nckiav Won 0o farther and