The Princeton union. [volume] (Princeton, Minn.) 1876-1976, 1891-02-19

" 'l VIM ~ =. A1oullclly aCcllScu
Col. King Of writing a letter to
Mr.. Springer, chairman of the
congressional committee on cleo
tons, and asked for specimen of
Kings handwriting. Col. King
furnished a lengthy specimen of
his chirography and literally fayed
MIR. Donnelly. Mr.. King accused
Mr.. Donnelly Of gross corruption,
and cited instances that came under
his (King's) own observation. The
original letter was published in the
Pioneer Press at the time it was
written, but Mr.. Donnelly paid no
attention to it then. Now, how
ever, the eminent author and states
man takes exceptions to the letter
and has served a notice of retrac-
ton upon the editor of the Pioneer
Press. The p: 2: refuses to re-
tract, and an 100000 libel suit is
the result. The p 2: says edi-
torially:
When this letter was first published
in this paper, nearly eleven years ago,
in the heat of the controversy growing
out of his attempt to contest the elec-
ton of w. D. Washburn to the house
of representatives, Mr.. Donnelly made
no demand upon the Pioneer Press for
a retraction of any of the charges
therein contained, and he neither
brought nor threatened to bring any
suit for damages against the author of
the letter, or against any of the news
papers, including this one, which pub
lished it at that time. We respectfully
submit that it is too late now for Mr..
Donnelly to demand of the Pioneer
Press a retraction of charges which
passed unchallenged then. After hav-
ing neglected to seek his remedy at
law from the author and publishers of
these charges when they were fresh in
the public mind, and after having left
them unanswered for nearly eleven
years, he can hardly expect to impress
the public with the sincerity of his af-
fected outburst of virtuous Indignation
over their republication at the present
time Moreover, his quarrel is pri-
marily with Mr.. King and not with the
Pioneer Press. Mr.. King is fully able
to respond in pecuniary damages to
Mr.. Donnelly for any ibelous charges
which he may have uttered and caused
to be published. . The Pioneer Press
would be glad to oblige Mr. Donnelly
to the full extent of his demand if it
could be done with propriety, but it
does not quite see how it can consist
emily retract the charges which were
made against him by Mr.. King, or how
Mr.. Donnelly can consistently ask
for such a retraction from the publisher
at this late day when he neglected at
the proper time to demand it of the
author.
We are quite willing to say that we
know nothing personally, or except by
hearsay and lat second hand, of the
truth of any of the charges contained
in Mr.. Kings letter. But if, after so
many wasted opportunities, Mr.. DON
nelly now desires to press a judicial in
vestigation into the facts, the Pioneer
Press will cheerfully aid him to the full
extent of it's ability in making that in
yestigation an exhaustive one.
The Minneapolis Journal and
the Tribune of that city, and sew
eral other papers, have republished
the letter as it appeared in the
Pioneer Press, and Mr.. Donnelly
will have his hands full if he COM
mences libel suits against all of
these newspapers. However, if
the charges contained in Col. Kings
letter are true, Mr.. Donnelly-
now that he is so prominent in the
Alliance movement would be IT.
retrievably ruined politically. It
is a duty he owes to himself and
his followers to make the author
and publishers of that letter either
prove or disapprove of the serious
accusations therein contained.