The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1889-12-07
Still Unhappy.

ing under its load of contempt for some
thing or other. It preteads to think that II
il for the MORNING News, but 1t knows
that it is for itself Something the MORN
ING NEWS has said must have touched II IN |
a sore spot, judging from the noise it makes
What the MosSING News cannot |
understand is its anxiety in behalf of |
Messrs. Goodyear and Downing. Are |
these gentlemen the TimesF II 50, then |
we eau appreciate the whole situation. AS
far as we know these gentlemen have never
asked US to say that they did not vote Tor
Snelson for congress, aud have not denied
that they did The Times denied 1t, and
we published what the Times said. The
fact is. we never asserted that they voted
for Sneson. We said that if we were not
mistaken they supported him. The Times
said they did not vote for him, and
if the Times is Messrs. Goodyear and
Downing, or is their organ, 1t follows
we were mistaken. But whether we were
or not that fact has nothing to do with the
point which we originally made, viz, that
Messrs. Goodyear and Downing were incon-
sistent in making bitter fight against
colored man who sought Office from their
party. We understand that they supported
| Mr.. Dunn for collector. As the Tunes
undertakes to speak for the republican
| leaders at Brunswick, is it prepared to say
| whether or not Mr.. Duan voted for Snelsont
We have no reason to doubt that Messrs.
| GOODYEAR. Downing and Dunn are gentle
men against whom nothing can be said, but
that does not explain why the Times should
| consider that they have been grievously
injured by statement that they supported
for an Office man that their party had
nominated Will ths Times explain thisa
| We are in search of information now.
The Times attempts to support its asser-
ton that the MORNING NEWS "has heen
in the lead in all the outrageous misrepre-
sensations which have led to Dsveaux's ap-
pointment," and what pitiful attempt it
isl Notice the points it makes.
1. The MORNING NEWS has never uttered
word against Deyeaux's appointment.
Is that leading in Misrepresentation!
2. The MORNING NEWS has repeatedly
called Deveaux Colonel" and referred TO
Mr.. Dunn as Ii. f. Dunn.
This is Misrepresentation, is it ! Why not
blame the governor for making Deveaux
a colonela Why blame the MORNING NEWS
for respecting the governors commissions
Has the Times no respect for the acts of
democratic governor The cloven foo {
begins to appear.
8. The MORNING NEWS sought to create
the impression that Deveaux's appointment
was satisfactory to Brunswick democrats.
| because it said that they were not taking
an active part in the fight against 1t.
The MORNING NEWS didn't try to do
| A. l.; aaI Ha kn0
it didn't. The MORNING NEWS said las
far as we know the democrats of Bruins
wick are not taking an active part in the
Q fight against Col Dsveaux." The MORN
, ING NEWS does not yet know of an,
} democrats who went to Washington tc
oppose Deveaux or in any other way made
? themselves conspicuous in the fight There
NAV have been, however. Will tho Times
please mention them?
a f. There are reasons to believe that tn
MORNING NEWS was aware that the Presl
. dent thought negro collector would b.
u acceptable to majority of the people o
Brunswick.
l. Could anything be more silly than this
! We never knew the President had such a
10 impression, and never before heard it sug
IS gested that he had.
r 5. The MORNING NEWS knew the
appointment citizens of Savannah had ii
~ dorsed Deveaux and suppressed the fact.
This is not true The MORNING NEW
doesn't know that Deveaux was Endorsed
IN ANYBODY in Savannah. 1t only knows the
Vi the Times says he was.
OF These five points which we have al
us swered, the Times calls five bits of truth
no 1t ought certainly have contempt for som
p, body, and, we repeat, it can find no mo
RAJ deserving object than itself.
lat The Times does not know, apparentl
lal the meaning of the English language
as asserted the other day that the MoRNIl
IL NEWS had 'intimated" that the appoir
us meut of Dsveaux would cause a riot
o. Brunswick. We denied this assertio
ne In supporting it the Times quot
TO a Washington dispatch published
lm the MORNING News to this effect: ''St
i1e rotary Window has been warned that OK
'ne Deveaux's appearance in Brunswick as
10Y lector may cause riot"
on Is that an intimation by the NEWS
n.y. anything! Is it not simply statement
the fact that Secretary Window had bt
e warned? But who could have given
|, secretary the warning! Let the Times
.;DD quire. 1t may get some interesting inf
Gov, nation.
The Times is mistaken. The NORM
vor NEWS is not angry. 1t simply regrets I'll
there is newspaper that will resort
49, such means as the Times has to sustain.
rct untenable position.
its The esteemed Philadelphia Press is {
| - chit ,rrNh aCanSa Mr. Mar,