The Forrest City times., 1888-07-28
THE OFFICIALS soUEAL.

~''' oo nave lhe -C0ffey-Feath. erston letter prominently in thei, minds. As ih it are contained several weak, if not ridiculous assertions, we desire to point them out to our readers
 first, their reason for writing tba, letter. How could We allude to them any other way, except by name. We do hold any man in contempt, political. ly, who accepts honors of a party yea, after year, and then tries to overthrow It. We have the greatest contempt fo, such a man.
 These officers admit that our readers elected them to their offices, and say "out of regard for their good opinion etc, Do any of our readers believe they have any regard for their good opinion No. Well, then, would your Impression of them been better had they kept silence. Yes. And now they have spoken, you think less of them, than before? Yes. Their si. fence conveyed nothing, their article 2 less.
 If, after holding office year after year, given to those men by an adopted mode, they denounce the mode. we would like to know what else but in. gratitude and soreheadism one might name their actions. Again, their course being vituperous, we have per haps indulged in vituperation. We have no doubt that it is unpleasant for them. We will show them that it will be more unpleasant yet, when they are defeated at tue polls. Vituperation is not used in lieu of facts, but to fol- low the facts We have stated. We re- gret that occasion demands such an ag- gressiye campaign, and that we must needs down a political ring, made up of former democrats, or see our party perish, It is beyond our understand ing, if they have any good reason for the course they are pursuing.
 We don't differ in our opinions as to the object of primary election. It is simply to select the strongest man of a political party, to put against man selected by the enemy. Prior to the last primary election there HAD been objections. There are always some persons to object to all things. Even to God himself. But prior to the last primary, as far as We are informed. the objectors laid aside their objections and submitted themselves to the will of the majority. It has been left, we presume, for those very men-W-C-&F. ito revolutionize the great democratic party of Arkansas, and all its grand principles and customs. They say ''as candidates, they entered the lists and abided the results concientiously." /" They received the nomination. Of course they abided, they had it to do. They had no desire to do any thing else. They could not now be holding the offices they do, had they manifested signs of dissatisfaction. But when the second primary of 1886 was ordered for the purpose of settling the Jones' Brooks affair, who was the first one to cry out against the custom. Did not Judge,Coffey take the lead Did he not devote great deal of time in the wes- tern part of the county trying to defeat the nominee ? It is our information that he was one of the first bolters, but he was a sly coon. He worked on friends secretly.
 It IS NOT matter of general infor- nation that fraud was discovered < ia that primary, affecting the clerk only" It is true that fraud was "de- clared" and new election was ordered by the committee for the purpose of testing the ballot and harmonizing the clements. The two results were about the same.
 If you gentlemen KNOW of any frauds practiced in any election it is your duty to make them known and name the parties. To say, 'as to which of the factions practiced the fraud, or both, it is not our province to say" is straddling the question. If you are afraid to say which or who, why, if we were in your positions, we would ''go off and hide, " until the question is settled
 We don't believe the matter concern ing the chairman of the democratic central committee, and will leave that for him to answer. We will say, however, that as an individual he has the right to hire any man to do any thing, if he can find the man do it, if he does any thing against the law, he Is amen' able to the law. There is nothing in that charge to justify any democrat Tn renouncing his allegiance to his party or in endeavoring to dethrone 1t. Now we believe the above is an impartial, unprejudiced statement of facts as re- cards the reasons given by these men for their actions. They mention but two reasons. The first, that there was fraud in the primary election by which they were selected as the standard bearers, and second, that, it is matter of public property that an INDIVIDUAL offered Sl, 900 as a campaign fund to a republican if he would run against the nominee for Judge. The first is an un- certainty and the latter, but rumor, absolutely, as we honestly believe, hay ing no foundation. Admitting, for the sake of argument that both charges are absolutely true. Is there any thing in them. Is the democratic party re- sponsible for either. Did not the par ty do all in it's power to have fair election, did not the party do all It could, by fair and honorable means to elect the nominees of its primary elec- tion? We believe 1t did, and we do oo. aal m ona can consistently. hold