The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1890-01-29
HE is AT HIM AGAIN.
"a True Liberal Winds Up Com
stock G0Odwin'S Clock.
SOME MORE FACTS TO CHEW OVER
sold MANA afraid of the Truth, is Punctured
by the Keen Shafts of Truth-Gum
it Over.
To the Editor of THE HERALD.

To the Editor of THE HERALD
There now, I've gone and done it, I've
appeared in public print. Pm like some
fellow wrote-I don't know who it was
STOOLS rush in where angels fear to tread.''
Z mind, like an honest man; to show up
abuses; though I may say to myself, ''if
those things be done in the green tree,
what will be done in the dry" "a man
with good gun, heavy shot, young eye,
a true aim and steady hand, when he has
popped his piece at the crows, he sees that
those who are wounded fiutter most. Some
body flutters, somebody is hurt in the Tri-
i5une Office, and there are feathers fiuttering
and flying around My little shot tells.
am not used to appear in print, and am
mot to the manor born" so that my
''screedn was offensive to the pure mind
and literary taste of the erudite and pug
nacious editor of the Tribune But as the
schoolboy says, Il didn't do nawthin'
to him. and why does he sqneal.
l expected I would catch it
hip and thigh. But my anticipation was
greater than the possession, as the thing
did not hurt, and Richard is himself
Sagain." Indeed, feel rather proud of my
inexperienced effort, and may try it again,
Nutu SuCl ABUSES anu lTIchS cAlSU.
THE REASON AM MUCH PROUD
is this: l have always respected the chief
editor of the Tribune as man of ability, a
keen satirist, and a hard hitter generally:
but this slap at me is so weak that though
l see the blow aimed, it doesn't reach
within an arms length; his lash is so thin,
and the hand so powerless, that the whip
recoils only around his own head, and |
merely cock my fingers and say, TRY it
again"
Did you. Mr.. Editor, ever see such a
poor, weak thing as that attack by the
Tribune on poor fellow like me! Has he
defended his men, or shown that nv COM
plants are unfounded! Has he proved that
1 have falsitied anything, or not told the
truth-not the whole truth-yet nothing
: but the truth! No. Well, notwithstand-
ing his great ability, he cannot refute he
can only abuse. He has a bad cause; |
have the right on my side; and somebody
has said, would rather be right than be
President of the United States No arm
can be strong, no weapon successful in a
bad cause.
He censures me for not giving my full
name or going to that paper first Well, [
know 1.-The dagger strikes deepest when
struck in the dark" and / wanted to give
the political trickery and ungrateful.
short-sided manipulators a good thrust
And didn't get it in well! But he Just
followed me ia that line He is unpersonal
in his article The choice is with me, not
with him, as to whether | shall subject N.Y.
self to the abuse of great paper and a
host of political cliques. / am not great
hghter-many a man l never killed, and l
claim
MY RIGHT AS AN AMERICAN CITIZEN
to free speech in my own way. so long as
am not Hbelous or slanderous He is i'm
personal, as | said; for | don't know
whether the writer of that ''reply'' is Judge
Goodwin, Colonel Nelson, University ,Jes-
sup or Mr. Patrick Lannan.
The question should be, not who is the
writer, but is what ne says true or not ?
Truth IS as potent from the lips of tinker
like Banyan as from an archbishop How
many communications appear in the Tribune
under a non de plume, and without name
Are they all false, or are the writers
towards! Hardly. My attempt appears
in your paper III the same way. 1t is a poor
subterfuge for the editor, especially as his
name is withheld also.
/ carry my manuscript where please
especially where am treated courteouslv'
and ask no mans leave. Are nv remarks
true or not! is the question.
The remark by the editor, that sit will
take better evidence than the unsupported
word of the man himself, backed bv the
endorsement Of the grave-despoiler, to con-
vince any decent man that he III ever was
Liberal, except, perhaps for revenue. }, is
contemplate and unworthy a respectable
man. L throw back the base insinuation in
his face, and 1t lowers his manhood in nv
estimation. He knows he is only vicious
and suspicious, and that, too, because he
knows have right on my side to his great
chagrln. SO far as revenue is concerned on
nv part, can only say, and my defense in
fmy apology for this personal reference. I
s,ssfye freely and literally "many time and
{oTt,' even Ia this campaign, but never re-
ceiVed a cent Tor any service, and further
more, never expected one.
so far as my '.guSh" over the "charac-
teri OF o. e. Whitney is concerned. I NAV
say that never exchanged twenty words
with M. Whitney during these twenty
years, bat though hemay be a pronounced
Mormon fanatic" ETC., as charged. the
editor does not show that 'tfor ability.
talent and integrity to cause,n the man
Walden is his equal in any respect l care
not how erroneous a man may be in his
views on religious subjects, will accord to
him that for which he is distinguished. and
the requirements he possesses by organi-
cation, education and study, would
GIVE EVEN THE DEVIL HIS DUE.
The fanaticism of Whitney in his views
is no more pronounced than the fanaticism
OF millions OF Catholics and Protestants, as
the editor well knows. But mo good can
come out of Nazareth | compared the
men because that Judge Powers was so in
conslderate ana dictatorial, if not de-
grading and unworthy gentleman
Nm such a position. / commend any
man for being pronounced in his
opinions, and he is to have due credit for
ms stand. But that does not say en-
dorse mans religious or irreligious
views, because I aclynorvladua bic ao+,,ol
worth But is Mr.. Whitney any more pro-
nounced In his views than Judge Goodwin
is IN ms! And has not one the equal right
Of the other. There is where the mischief
OF many lles-they see not their own fanat
icism while they decry that of Others.
Render every man his DUE
If 1.-The character of the assault Ttruthl
displays his my ignorance the editor
has not shown wherein. / know 7 am not
over wise-not wise enough to be a sspolicv
mani; not wise enough to ALWAYS shout
with the crowd-and if two crowds. then
with the biggest one. Had / been so wise
4sS1to do that, l would not have been in the
Liberal ranks during the years past. I
keep my own individuality, hope, AMI am
not swayed with crowds, nor do 1 run with
malorities, because they are maiorities.
Have not the ''four or five whom 1
named" done more for the Liberal cause
than the person named? Is not that truce
Can he dispute the facts l stated and the
meanness shown to our "war horses'' in
Liberalism here! / did not attack any
mans character on the ticket did not
set out to do that. / gave them all the
credit 1 could for moral character His
assertion is gratuitous when he says l did
not know that the "parties named, with
one exception, refused nomination. and
DO not know MIR. Scott. He merely dis