Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1889-02-07
THURSDAY. FEBRUARY Z. 1899
Tho CLAYTON Murder.

The Washington Post. which under us
new Republican editor IL capiia paper,
seems 10 try 20 draw o distinction between
charging the southern people With the @ur-
der Of Mr.. CLAYTON. o. Arkansas, md call
ing that murder political one. The Post
expresses surprise that this foul murder mas
not been CONDEMNED by the southern pres"
In one grand chorus OF ex'crstion and adds
that whilst quite number OF papers have
risen coursseousy TO the proper plsne OF
denuncisti0n many others apparently SHRINK
from their duty in the premises.
This IL showing friendship for the South
with a vengeance. our Washington con-
Temporary would not expect the southern
papers TO disclaim being accessories before
the fact II 1t were q case Of larceny, or ROB
berv, or arson; but II insists upon 1t that the
southern press ought to denouuce the CLAY
TON murder "in one grand chorus OF exc
crstion"l why, pray? "heth'nks he
doth protest too much" would have been the
CRY OF the northern msllEnsnts II the south
ern editors had raised the bue-snd'cry
against the murderer OF CLAYTON. Northern
editors are not expected 10 devote their tlns
10 the depuncistion Of murders committed in
that section OF the country.
The Post bees the question. II sets out
with the assum ption that the murder was
ga political one" aud bases lite rebuks OF
the southern press upon that fact. II declares
in 80 many words that II never supposed
that Mr.. BRscTINRIDGs had iugst to do with
the murder. or any knowledge OF it. orwould
in any wise counienhnce such an outrage.
We give II credit for that disclaimer, but
we claim as high a tone for the southern peo-
nile NJ n body ., the Post credits 10 Mr.
BRIcEnEpGE.
Bot what Is "a political murder" II Mr..
BREcEiSKIDGE had nothing TO DO with itT
Did The Democratic editors in the South
have anything 10 do with ~ on, no. Old
the Democratic party a, = party have any
thing TO do with ~ Oh, no. How, then.
can il be riGbtiullv denomlnsted "a political
MURDER? What IL mesnt by the phra'ei
Was it polilcsl murder because the vii
lains who committed II we're DemocratsY II
we admit a. true that wholly uHtensble pro
position, still We cannot ssy that the murder
was political one; because nsbody knows
who committed It. How many Democrats
must take paSt in murder in tue South
ia order TO make II a political murderi
How many Republicans mut pfrtlci-
pate in murder in the North in
order TO make It a political murderi Was
the murder Of Mr. BlSnT. prominent
Temperance editor, who Wm a1as,inated
precisely the same WAY a. Mr.. CLAYTON. and
only night or two Afterwards. in Wisc1n.
Sin, a political murder: II not, why moi?
1t is TN unspeakaole outrage upon The
southern people that they should thus be
Hbeled by northern Republican jourosls.
Even the Washington Post would subject
the Democratic editors In the south TO test
Ike that which was applied TO SnEpnAcu,
MEsuACH, aud AB.DNEGO. They are called
upon 10 Join IN chorus OF execratiou Of the
murder Of Mir. CLAYTON IN order 20 prove
that though 1t was Political murder they "a
Democrats had nothing 10 do WITH IT, We
decline thus to sbsse ourselves.