The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-04-11

IF the Indianapolis journal wishes to snarl
at the News, we have no objection; but when
it takes the first and last sentences of para
graph and distorts meaning from them
which did not and could not exist in the face
of the context, we object, in the name of de-
cent journalism, to such treatment. It is dis
honest and contemplate"
The Journal is quite willing to be judged in
comparison with the News for decent jour
nalism." We did not quote the entire para
graph because it was not germane to the
point of criticism, which applied to the three
not two-sentences we reprinted, and the
meaning Of which cannot be distorted" nor
nnitigated by any context whatever. Howev-
er, to meet the News we now quote the para
graph entire:
''There seems to be deal of unnecessary
pother about the surrender Of Lee twenty
years ago. We assume that the fact is pretty
well authenticated, and that the particulars of
it do honor to Grant no less as skillful gen
eral than humane man. He pounded Lee
out of Petersburg, after one of the most
memorable sieges Of history, and then, in the
hare and-hounds campaign that followed,
headed him off at every turn and ran him
down, foreseeing the end before Lee did, and
proposing, in the interests of humanity that
he surrender before Lee would admit that
there was no escape from it. He finally had
to admit it, and surrendered and he was
accorded terms out of Grants free will and
humanity, that will be as great glory to
Grant as anything he did to force the inevita-
bleness of surrender All this happened
twenty years ago, and is history now. Lee is
dead, and Grant soon will be"
The News gives General Grant proper honor,
both as General and "a humane man, but,
begging its pardon, the Journal did not, by
word or implication, intimate that it withheld
any due appreciation from the dying General.
What we did say was. that the first sentence
was petulant exclamation Of annoyance at
the ''potherv made over the surrender of Lee
at Appomattox, which seems to have unpleas
antly affected the nerves of the News, and the
last sentence is an indication that when
''Grant will be dead, as Lee is, there may be
less of that 'spother," and such purists as the
News relieved from hearing about the war
If the paragraph as a whole, and the sentences
mean nothing, which is probably dis
tinguishing characteristic of many of the
paragraphs turned out by the News with its
usual 'thus-saith- the-L Lord" air. But we
think the sentences and the paragraph mean
just what we said they meant, and believing
so, we repeat that the entertainment and the
expression of such sentiment, while it may
not be dishonest" is Contemplate. 1t is
probably not dishonest, for it is in har-
mony with the recent editorial in which the
News begged to be relieved in the future from
the "vaporings" of ex-soldiers of the Union
about their patriotism" and their Services
That such paragraph can be printed in a
paper like the News is the strongest possible
proof of the coming of the time, predicted by
the Journal as no uncertain probability when
service for the government in the war of the
Rebellion will be disability rather than an
honor.