The times. (Owosso, Mich.) 1882-1897, 1886-12-03

tC1afinued from first pags.)
The sale of the same as beverage" The
vote stood. prohibition. mo" SO, 143; pro-
addition, Eyes" 7s, 462, defeated by 10.
cSi votes. So now we find something soas
jone. and that they were not driven by
the third party, because that party was or
ganized about two years later and run its
iirst candidate (Black) four years later
tlS7s). So every charge. when examined.
IN the light of history and the interest of
truth will rise and pass away like a
mist before the mid day SUM-"
Now just few words about my being
caught mapping. This is an irrelevant
matter, but of his own introduction. Bro.
Stalker asked how man can be terribly
strong prohibitionist without being in sym
patty with the third party; answered
that by names aud figures to show not a
man only. but an army of them, who
showed by their voting that they were not
in sympathy with the third party while
they were with prohibition. The figures
referred to stand thus: In the prohibi.
lion states north the third party polled
ia,36l votes; while for prohibition straight
100000 were polled, a ratio OF Al to 1.
Perhaps / was in error in mentioning
Mrs Foster; man being called for. AS
Ia Miss Willard, 1884. etc., was not
amiss as ALL AS to his reference TO anti
slavery men not being in sympathy, etc.
let us just look at the question involved in
the analogy he offered. Think of a man
being terribly strong anti slavery man in
1850. yet having no sympathy with the
Republican party" He says my reply to
that question grew out Of my confounding |
She two types Of anti,slavery men and so
does not merit reply. did not confound
~ all. presented not only two hut three
iypes-thc Garrison Phillips non political,
shc Gerritt Smith liberty party, and the
non-exteusion Republican type. But as
his call was for TERRIBLY strong" ones l
laid emphasis on thos, so terribly strong
that they could not or would not stop with
he compromise ~ of non extension. Bro.
Stalker says the anti-slavery man referred
TO in my (his) closing suggestion was of
he Republican type. not the Gerritt Smith
type as all its connections signify" l re-
ferred to those who were 6cliercrs in the non
extension principle. Let me say TO Bro.
Stalker !ha. al named were opposed to
aa tension rs we'll as in favor Of abolition.
He does no, because he cannot deny that
presented q force Of ''tcrribly strong
sati slavery men OF another type than
hose in sympathy with tho Republican
party. That was just what he asked me
10 do. Now let him complete his state
by inserting his explanation as published
last week. 1t will read thus: Think OF
mau being terribly strong anti-savery
nan Ga licver in the non-cxlcnsion
principle of the Republican iypc) in 1856
md yet having NO sympathy with the Re-
publican party" II such was his mean
ing why did he not say, will +. IL. please ;
inform me how amsn can be terribly
strong prohibilionist of the 81. JOHN type
without being in sympathy with the third
party? What he C ,llcd for was terribly
strong anti slavery man with u little "a"
,e, being ont of sympathy with party
With big "R.' And now he says "you
ire mapping" because do not revolution.
ize the thought To some minds il may
De an open question whether was nap
,ipg or he was squirming @ee ,s-
gave Bro. Stalker what he asked and :
hen he says practically them amt the
sind want" Well il he talked so blind
Y at Pittsburg we shall have to believe
hat he may have made, etc, but all this
nay be irrelevant and not worthy of notice ,
~ him. j. A. FRENCH. !