The Ouachita telegraph. [volume] (Monroe, La.) 1865-1889, 1888-10-20
A Reply to Mr.. I'earce.
shreveport Tilnes.]

? t-r ...- t.a-t5-;. q. -..n- ....+r
(shreveport Times.]
MONROE, la, October IS, 1856.
ID. Pearce, Esq, Editor RustOu Cali
graph Aneditoriai appearing I'm your
Issue of today relative 10 the action vi
the congressional convention, ia so vim
dtcttvei In lie tone aud an tull IF mis-
representations OF my Ut esenl nna past
connection With politics of this district,
that deem 1t my duty to answer it
through the earliest means of commu-
njcatjon with tho public,
You say In referring to Mr.. Newton 3
candidacy, ''he was not acceptable be-
cause he was not the man the Ouachita
Ring wanted 10 send to Congress, the
Ring had man for that place and that
man must be nominated whether he
suited any other voter Ia the district
except the ringsters or not; it was the
same ring that said four years ago that
General King must not be sent to Con-
grese any more, aud that Mr.. @: J..
Boatner must 60 In his stead"
In another place you say: "Nor. G.
J. Boatner was the candidate of the
Oaachtta Ring then as he Is now"
When you make unqualified asser-
lions you ought 10 know that they are
supported by facts, aud tn the foregoing
you are entirely in error.
was nat the candidate of the Qua
chita Ring In 1884 nor in the recent
convention.
II 1t be true that what Is known as
the Ouachita Ring had a candidate be-
fore the recent convention, I certainly
was not the man and was not even
thought OF In that connection, tho
sentiment here being divided between
Mr.. F. G. Hudson ard Mr.. J. s.
Boatner as second choice, and then
only in event Of Mr.. Newton's with
drawaI. s.'" ...
In 1884 a number of influential gen.
tlemen, who are charged with being
members of what was and is known as
the Ouachita Ring, led by Gen. W. Il.
Theobalds, were my most determined,
active and implacable opponents, carry
ing a portion of the delegation from
this parish against mo and being large
iy Instrumental in the loss of other
parishes, which prevented me from
obtaining an undisputed majority in
the convention which followed.
liza Ring sought to obtain my nomi-
nation four years ago and afterwards
my election, Mr.. Newton was one OF
the leading members of that Ring, be-
] cause he was one of my most earnest,
energetic and valued supporters from
start to finish, and has never YET
apologized for it that know Of.
The fact Is that no ring supported
me then or in the recent convention,
and was urged and solicited to accept
this nomination by large number OF
gentlemen, who were my most vigorous
and uucompromising opponents in tho
campaign to which you have alluded
You do the convention, rs we'll rs
myself, gross injustice when you sup.
| press the fact that neither sought no,
desired the nomination rendered to me
by eleven of the fifteen parishes com
prising the district, aud only accepted
II because l was assured that after 9
six days session was The only one npoI
whom the convention could unto
these assurances coming chiefly from
gentlemen who had been heretofore po
litically opposed to me-justitied rnr,
thought, In yielding to their views.
You also suppress the fact that my
name was put in nomination by Mr.
NewtOn's delegation, who thereby EN-
phasized their conviction of my loyalty
to hfm and earnest desire that n,
should have been renominated:
But for the fact that your paper will
not be issued again for nearly week
I should ask space in its columns t.
repel what I consider unjust and un
founded aspersions against me. AS
do not wish to be misjudged on thu
strength OF incorrect statements, avail
myself of to-morrow's daily papers I.
give this to the public.
! am, respectfully, your obedient ser
want, G. j. BoATNER.
The N. O., N. Il f. 3. Railroad.
| [NatcheZ Democrat