Lexington weekly intelligencer. (Lexington, Mo.) 1871-1887, 1886-07-31

We are glad to see that our article
ga Campaign of Dirt" has taken a
deep hold upon the mind OF our con-
temporary, the Post. 1t is volumlnous
in its replies. Its principal article taken
by itself, is plausible-it would be q
culous in us to ask the Post to refrain
from taking advantage of the dlssen-
siOps of democrats in the interest OF its
party. The Intelligencer recognizes
the Justice OF what the editor OF the
Post says this far; only, this paper
v believed in the nastinesses about
Blaine any more than in those in regard
to Cleveland, and said as little about
them as its republican contemporaries
would permit. 1t did use Blaine's pub
lie record against him, as our contem-
porary is welcome to do with any dem
ocratic official, without arrangement
from us, if it sticks to the truth. The
issue is not there. 1t is here. The
Post and its editor had a war in Hlg-
ginsville in which both finally lost.
There were hard words, harsh charges
in that war. Grant that they were I'M
just, untrue, yet the democratic papers
outside of Higginsville might have
made much OF them. They did not,
but treated the Post with the
greatest fairness and courtesy.
When this campaign came on the Post
defended MI. Steele against attacks
made upon him because of third-term-
ism, and it's editor is known to think
well of both Messrs. Steele and Conner.
Then, ifthey are gentlemen, if they are
faithful officers, it is wrong for the
Post to charge them with being ring
sters and bosses, at the instigation of
whomsoever. The Post is particularly
estopped from doing this, because II
gave its editorial protest, not once, not
twice, but frequently, against the cause
of these libelous jibes. No one says
the Post originated the campaign of
dirt, but dirt is just as dirty at second
as at first hands, and it is dirty to cry,
''Boss, boss; ring, ring!" at honest gen.
tlemen, who attend conscientiously to
their business and uniformly treat
other people with respect; and we be-
lieve the Post thinks so too. 1t is meant
to and IS calculated to create the i'm
preston that they are engaged in some
disreputable OF corrupt business, when
| it is not true. 1t is not necessary to
mention their anne 1t is well known
that the expressions are used against
two men in particular, because they are
candidates for longer tenure of Office
than was desired by their critic. So
far as our criticisms of democratic
utterances of this kind go, they are not
because gentlemen oppose the Intelli-
gencer, but because they oppose their
party organization. We have had
something to say upon this subject
frequently before, and no doubt will
again, but that has nothing to do with
our little controversy with the Post.
"We think that the Intelligencer
makes a mountain of a mole hill in its
labored argument in regard to %electing
delegates to the congressional conven.
ton at the late county convention" Sc
says the Odessa Democrat of yester-
day. We are not making a mountain
of a molehill, simply pointing out the
danger, thai in case of a disagreeable
nomination many democrats may justi-
fly apathy OF worse by alleging irregu
larity. That our argument was moi
labored, but flowed naturally from the
facts, is attested by the Democrats owl
article, in which it says:-"Nobody
disputes the reasoning of the Intelli.
gencer, that the people were not con
suited in regard to imposing upon thu
delegates to the convention the add
tional duty of electing congressional
delegates, or that it was according to
precedent" Now, there is the whole
thing in a nutshell. The people wer,
not consulted, and the action was un
precedented. For both reasons, in
district as close as this one, it was un
wise. We shall support the nominee
of the democratic convention at Kan.
sas City, be he whom he may, agains
any republican, for reasons which w,
shall set forth when the time comes
but say 5 per cent. OF the democrats O
Lafayette county are offended by tn,
irregularity complained of and declin
to vote, may not this result in the de
feat of the democratic nominee? TIL
Democrat objects to the slur agains
the convention by our correspondent
in which We did not coincide, vet
casts a slnr upon the democrats VIII,
are not of its way of thinking, by init
mating that they are politicians, rattle
than of the people. In this countr,
every citizen is a politician, ever on
neighbor being amenable to the charge
We have heard democrats in all walk
of life speak of the matter, numbers q
them, and all in the same way; not tina
they feel inclined to make any nois
about it, but because they do not az
prove. 1t is a question of party law AN,
we have been spoken to by numbers {
democratic lawyers, all of whom thin
as we do; among them, Henri
! G. Wallace, William Young, Richar
Field, I'D Shewalter, VIM. II. Chiles
> A. F. Alexander, Xenophon Rylan6
VIM. B. Wilson, John S. Blackwell an
Albert Strother. These gentlemen al
!, no better than other democrats, but
the question is n of party law thei
, opinion is valuable. AS the Democra
E says, there is still ample time to RENE
dy the matter, and in the interest Of til
party, and so far as we are concerne
the party alone, we trust that it will b
, done.