Roseburg review. [volume] (Roseburg, Or.) 1885-1920, 1885-12-04
fMf. Rtdalc.s Re1,lu.

In your last issue appears an article as an
editorial that you term Conscience" while
there are a very long pair of ears known ears)
plainly visible in every line, yet as you have
given it place in your paper as an editorial it
would appear that you endorse its statements
and sentiments. The writer of your editorial
quotes me as saying things that he must have
known that never uttered notwithstanding
the Oregonian SO reported it, but the writer
knew full well that on the following day that
the Oregonian made a correction and gave
substantially what did say which, except with
few omissions, was as follows:
Mr.. President wish to say that there is
not a Republican on the floor Of this Joint
Convention who feels the responsibility that
rests upon US to elect Senator more than l.
There is no one that has greater desire to
elect Senator that would be credit to Ore
gon than /, but in this case want to thank
those Democrats who have taken the respon-
sibiity of this election into their hands.
want to return home with the proud satisfac-
ton that my vote as 4 representative of the
people was not cast for John II. Mitchell.
II the writer of your editorial wilfully mis-
represented me then that is a matter for his
conscience" and as for the words that / did
utter l have no regrets TO express or apology
to make. They were the honest expressions
of my convictions and conscience. As
strange as ii may appear to those Democrats
who applaud the election Of Mitchell that any
one should have a conscience" you say "If
the Supreme Ruler cared no more for this man
than did the Democrats who supported Mitch
ell, then no doubt it was applauded and appre
ciated elsewhere"
1t did seem that the Supreme Ruler was
not present and controlling the actions of those
te ex,.l,o 1ta1 ATifchall lint hat
many honest Democrats came promptly for
ward and thanked me for what said is true.
As to the charge that have misreprcsented my
constituency have just this TO say, that in all
my dealings with the public / have been as
open as the day, every one has known just
where to find me on all public questions.
The Senatorial question as we'll as others
That nine out of ten south OF the Calapooia
mountains favored the election of Mitchell is
simply ridiculous, and Judging from the ex
pressions of my neighbors and those who /
have talked with Ilwould reverse your calcu-
lation and say that a majority are opposed to
Mitchell and that those nearest of kin to me
were in favor Of his election is resented by
them with Indignation.
That there are many worthy people who
were in favor Of the election of Mitchell, am
willing to believe, and with them / have no
quarrel, believing that on mature reflection
and the exercise of little "conscience, that
they will endorse my position.
To Mitchell Democrats have no apology
to make. That ]. II. Mitchell was elected
| by corrupt bargain with Democrats seems
| to me to be good and sufficient reason for
any Republican for Withholding his support.
The writer of your editorial says that when
Mr.. Riddle returns to his home at Grants Pass
outside Of Douglas county &c. &c. Now, l
wish to say that am living in Douglas county,
on the farm that my father settled in 1851.
That it is my home. That my family live
there. That l expect to end my days there
with ''conscieece" as clear as an honest pur-
is welcome to his conscience. And for you
Mr.. Editor, after the great good you have
done asa teacher Of morality truth and Virtue,
can now endorse the election of J. H. Mitchell,
then that is a matter for you to settle with
your conscience. Yours truly.
GEO. w. RIDDLE.
We cheerfully give place in this issue to a
letter from Hon. G. w. Riddle. We deem
it the duty of Journalist to hold himself above
prejudice and deal fairly with the public, The
columns of his paper should be free to ex-
PLANTATION and correction In this instance il
seems to be more matter on the part of Mr..
Riddle of apology and plea of "not guilty. >
We cheerfully accept his apology and sise
proper weight to his defense. Mr.. r. says
he did not call Mitchell an "infamous' man,
and that the Oregonian corrected this state
ment in due time. How did the Oregonian
make the mistake in the first instance? Doubt
less corrected it only when it discovered that
popular sentiment was largely against its I'M
wonted attacks upon Mitchell. Has this circum-
stance had any effect upon Mr., Riddles mem,
ory2 Three members of the Legislature who
participated in the late joint convention be,
sides four private citizens that were present
at the time have informed us that Mr.. Riddle
did use the word Infamous. But, no matter,
once for all let it pass. Mr. Riddle is not the
only man that is ashamed regretful of a
hasty expression, The public would dccid-
edly prefer to believe that Mr. Riddle did not
utter such language and we shall discourage
the overwhelming testimony against him. II
is easy to forget and people should do it, In
our humble way we are still "a teachers" and
with a clear i''conscience' urge ''charity
toward all. We sometimes accept aid from
the pens of our friends only to add to the
ability of our paper, but under all circum
stances we are responsible for the editorials
therein appearing. Other papers might profit
by our example. In conclusion we are glad
to learn that Mr. Riddle has left Grants Pass
and taken up his residence with US. Welcome
TO old Douglas once more.