Bennington semi-weekly banner. (Bennington, Vt.) 1894-1902, 1895-04-12

schhol any farther than he is right. When
it is shown that in his public acts or pri-
vate life he is wrong, this paper will not
support him. On the other hand we be-
lieve we reflect the sentiment of the
community when we say that mans
character must not be wantonly destroy
ed, that little coterie of unscrupulous
enemies may make him their victim.
With these remarks let us examine the
letter. When he says that For some
years majority of the patrons of our
school have felt that a change in its head
was desirable" he ignores the fact that
in every school meeting in this village
for five years past the people have not
said this by their votes. In these annual
school meetings for five years past, until
that of the other day, trustees have been
| elected who we're known to favor the Su-
perintendent. 1t is true that since last
June majority of the trustees, a major
ity of one, has been against the head of
the school, but does Mr.. Valentine wish
to call out the facts that made certain
trustees turn against Mr.. Davis.
Mr.. Valentine says that the effort to
elect with reference to changing that ma
| jOri ty aroused effort. We submit that
statement to the people. By whom was
the effort made? We are not aware
that any organized effort was made to
elect men pledged to Mr.. Davis. Ger
tanly in the 7th ward but one candidate
was named, and he had Mr.. Valentines S
ardent support. In the 9TH ward, Mr..
Bingham, not pledged to any one, was
first in the field by general consent. Had
that not been the case, we cannot say
that the friends of the Superintendent
would not have supported DR.. Pratt in
the 5th as they did Mr.. Wall in the 7th.
Does this look like undue eff ort on the
part of anyone to elect men favorable to
Mr.. Davis? If Mr.. Valentines statement
that the school fight was eliminated by
the efforts of Mr.. Davis's friends to
change the majority on the board of
trustees is marked by fairness and can
mean.
In this point we must aver that, had
the Livingston faction shown no more in
terest in the election than the school
people did, had they conducted clean,
fair, open. manly campaign, it is our
firm conviction that a large part of the
300 who voted as they did would have
voted on the other side.
Mr.. Valentines effort to make it ap-
pear that the BANNER has ever criticised
these voters as ignorant or malevolent is
unworthy of him and will miscarry. If
he will turn to our editorial he will see
that we said these people did not intend
to vote wrong, but that some of them had
voted upon false information. And this
| is what the BANNER complains of, this
dissemination of foul ISLANDERS and cor
rupting lies, solely to carry an election
against a man who could not be defeated
by honorable means.
For three or four weeks before the
school meeting, idle tales, scandalous
stories, were secretly set going to infu.
ence voters. Night and day these ru-
mors were poured into the ears of men
and women on the sly. No one could
trace them, none knew whence they came
or whittier they went They rested up
on no foundation that we could or can
find. Time, circumstances, places were
all wanting. 1t was wanton and scan
dalous assassination of character. Will
honest men deny this? Why were these
stories set afloat? Was it because they
were true? No. 1t was done to influence
votes, and it did influence them, and the
circulation of these senseless stories is a
full and complete explanation of the
fact that three hundred out of four
hundred voted as they did. A few
more said 1--WE don't believe these
tales" The answer was: True or false,
Davis should be condemned" Is this a
Christian doctrine, principle that you
want to have applied to yourself? Could
these 800 voters have known that the
stories they had listened to we're the foul
est lies, many of them would have re.
buked the men who put the tales in cir.
culation.
Is Mr. Valentine fair when he says that
everyone was willing that Mr.. Davis
should be heard in the meeting? Why,
then, did Judge Darling, G. II. Mason,
Mr.. Valentine and member of the
clergy speak against it, at the head of a
party which came near defeating the
privilege? If Mr.. Valentine can afford
to make the statement that Everyone
was willing that Mr.. Davis should be
heard" we certainly are glad to print it.
The writer of the above letter knows
very we'll that at the meeting Mr. Davis
did not place himself in the attitude Of
defense. No charges have been made
against him that we know of by any per.
son, responsible or otherwise. As be-
fore stated he has been made the victim
of scandalous lies set a1Oat by unknown
parties, and his action at the meeting
was in the nature of a challenge to his
defamers to come out into the daylight
Was that bad or wrong or vicious or i'm
|