The Emporia weekly news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1881-1889, 1886-10-07
WHIFEWAsRED.

WHTTEWASRED.
Thsstate central committee Of the thiId |
party met yesterday ct Lawrence to con-
sider the charges made against their can
didats for the goveEnorship, and, a. they
claim, after . careful investigation, md
that the charges are purely Of personal
nature ana do NOT reflect on his character
or. Integrity a. Q Christian, and even 60 60
far q q state their belief in his entire In.
nocence Of any act Of injustice and justify
him In his pleading the statute Of lImita-
tiOns to sWindle his isther-in-laW out Of
his just dues.
In his answer to Mr.. Taylor's petition
now on file in the district court At Law
renee, Mr.. Branscombe says:
He specially admits the signatures to
the /. o. US given above, but says action
did not begin within the number Of years
required as provided by the laws OF Great
Britain, and adds his belief that such &C.
ton should commence within three years
from the date of the l. o. U.'s in order to
recover and thus avoid the statute OF lin
itation.
This is plain admission that he took
his father in-law's money, but never paid
It, but now pleads the statute of limitation
Yet in answer TO the charges he says:
l defy the most rigid scrutiny 20 show
that in my relations with Mr.. Taylor
have done any act inconsistent with the
character Of . Christian or gentleman.
Now the question naturally arises
whether it Is treating . man like 9
Chistian and Q gentleman to take his
money, give him his I. o. U. for the
same, refuse to pay il when due, and then
after many years, set up as defence th'
statute Of lImItationf Is this the way
that Christians and gentlemen are re-
quired to treat each other. Ali these thing
Mr.. BrAnscomb is charged IN the court
with doing. and his own fsther-ln-law Il
the man who was the victim and WHIT
now prefers these charges.
In Q card OF explanation 10 the Law
renee Tribune Mr.. Branscombe says:
Idesire 10 say In your columns, in a
| public q manner as you have used TOWARD
me, that the statements said to have beef
| made by John Taylor, and the comment
thereon In regard to my treatment of him
are tissue of malicious fAlsehoods.
When Mr.. BFanscombe wrote that sen
tence he also knew he had, on g torme
occasion, sworn to this one:
And the said defendant, Q. b. Brans
combe, AYERS that he has been informed
and IL Is his belief that the cause or actor
| Nu said "I. o. o." must be commences
thin three years from date OF the'1 O
j. in order to avoid the statute OF lImits
ton. and this he is ready to make Appea
In due time.
By this the reader may clearly see tina
the good Mr.. Branscombe does not den.
that he took Mr.. Taylor's money and Ap
proprIated Il to his own uses, but insist
that ne should not be compelled TO pa,
the same for the reason that IL Is outlawed
1t will keep Mr. Branscombe very busy
convince the people that these estate
ments' are "a tissue of malicious false
hoods"
There lie another fact that Mr.. BranI
combe will not deny: After having ad
mltted In his answer to Mr.. Tsylor's pc
titlon that he honestly owes that gentle
man large sum Of money and after haV
ing reduced him 70 absolute poverty
and knowing that he was an aged man, to
old and infirm to longer earn his own liv
ing, and q stranger in a strange city and
strange land ne deliberately turne
him - the father OF his vii
and the grandfather of his childre
into the streets to starvel Yet ne hi
the effrontery to say: "I hAYe treated hi
with the utmost forbearance ~ and that /
has never done "sny act Inconsistent wit
the character of a Christian or . gentle
mani" 80 transparent a hypocrite as M
Branscombe has proven himself to be /
, the words OF his own mouth, should |
given free transportation out Of the sta
. | on q rail.