The Londonderry sifter. (South Londonderry, Vt.) 1883-19??, 1889-02-28

The subjoined letter, after striking
outmuch that is too harsh and libelous
we publish simply as matter of fair
ness, being willing to give every man
a chance for his life, or an oppor-
tunity to defend his character. We
know nothing about the matter, and
have no interest in it, whatever, and
with this it must end:
LANDGRovE, VT,
FEB. %, 1889.
EditOr SITTER - In your last issue
notice piece about Albert L. Mullen, and
although this is not my name, yet as il
talks Of David Garfield and wife. etc,
presume was meant for me; and most al
tho statements being false you can but
in justice to me and the public grant me
the space to reply to this base scandal anc
also to show some of the reasons why
the said Garfield, who caused the piece tC
be published, is thus trying to iuinre my
character to those who are unacuuainteC
with me-; those who are know better. As
regards the town authorities of Richmond
placing my little girl at G. T. Abbott's
the facts are these: The custody of this
little one and two Others boy of six anG
baby of two years, was given the mother
with divorce with order for me to see
them at all times. The divorce was OBJ.
tanned by hiring people, among them my
three older children, to lie, as has been
proved in open court, and by the help of
a chap once well known in this vicinity.
Twas through his instrumentality arrested
for aggravated assault on my WIFE The
g n. H. Sentinel" quote in yours, stat
ing at the time that | knocked her down
with rolling pin, which was base lie.
and had no foundation whatever. except
in the weak brain of its correspondent in
Richmond, yet for all this and the fact
that they had six hired tools testifying
the worst possible, some of them swear
ing they would put me in States prison:
one of their witnesses being driven from
the stand by the Supreme Judge. And
although | did not summon one witness,
but simply told the truth, although not
being allowed to tell the whole truth. vet,
the jury failed to convict as charged
One year ago last October the mother
died, and although a rich half-sisfer OF
hers promised her on her dying bed that
she would take at least one of the little
ones aud care for it, yet within forty.
eight hours of her death threw the two
girls on the town. or placed them WHERE
she knew they would be. The day the
mother was buried / went there and ask.
ed this aunt, who assumed the charge OF
everything, what was to become of m,
little ones; she said she did not know
and when told her | was able, capabl,
and willing t. care for them as father
should and had right to, she flew at me
and she struck me several times with
her fists and said | had no business to see
or speak TO them. Within twenty-four
hours she was arrested and had the pleas
ure of bringing my boy 10 me, and the
Judge ordered him given to me. After the
others were thrown on the town went
to the overseer's of the poor and demand.
ed my chi dren: they refused to let Inc
have them and said they were both bound
out until eighteen years of age, which
was deliberate falsehood, as there were
no papers binding either of them until
after this. | took the youngest one that
day. Then they went to work to try d
bind my other one to G. T. Abbott.
understand thef hired a chap by the name
of J. B. Abbott to sneak off with her I'M