New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-11-19
Mr.. GARDINER'S ANSWER.

This is really terrible the way some bad peo-
ME have dared to attack that good man Of dis
tinguished ancestry Asa Bird Gardiner. NO
wonder he IS filed with Indignation. and says
So 10 the Governor in his answer to the charges
these insignificant and ribald accusers have
impudently preferred against him. The Idea
tbot q man Of Asa Birds talents and heredita-
ments should be subjected to inconvenience and
reproach because Of any NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. OF
a public office is really too much. 1t is all well
enough TO hold common office holders to strict
accountability for the way they do their duty,
but Mr. Gardiner is not a common oflice holder.
His worst enemy never charged him with being
that. He is as uncommon an office holder as
can anywhere be found. He himself puts the
case admirably when he says TO the Governor:
AS counsel for Generals Grant and Sheridan
and also for Mcdowell and Hancock; as pro-
lessor of law at the United States Military
Academy, West Point. and. finally as assistant
TO the Secretary OF War l had the happy
consciousness of the confidence ana the esteem
~ nv associates as we'll as Of good people OF
this nv native city where my family have been
located since the administration or Governor
Wouter Van Twier
If that doesn't prove that he Is a good Dis
trct Attorney. for Heavens sake what Will:
Who are these contemners Of dignity, these
irreverent upstairs who presume to speak evil
of the Renaissance of Wouter Van Twillerf
All IL dear old Wouter were only here, with
his wavy breeches and long pipe he would clap
them all in the stocks, Some Of them the noble
counsel for Grant and Sheridan cannot discover
among his old nelghbors Of New-Amsterdam
They are common folks, who don't move In his
set He saws: They are unknown to me and
unknown TO criminal court practice and men
must be insignificant indeed not to be known
70 one who by his own admission Is the best
District Attorney New-York ever had. The only
person in the crowd who seems to have at
tracted Mr. Gardeners notice is a clergyman,
and he, as It appears, largely because he min-
listers to a congregation "once presided over
as Mr. Gardiner says. "by my departed friend,
the sanity Henry W Bellows" We suspect,
however that this clergyman is remembered on
other accounts We believe he once dared TO
criticise the table manners Of the District At
torney, and to suggest more forciby than ele-
pantly that they called to his mind anything
hut the refinements Of hereditary culture. But
however that may be, this clergyman, according
TO Mr.. Gardiner. has changed his religion three
times" and we submit that man who does
that should have any standing as citizen.
II makes no difference whether the charges he
makes are true or not, they are invalidated by
the fact that he has changed his religion three
times. Mr. Gardiner is entitled to sympathy
that his dear old friend, the sanity DR.. Bel
lows should have had so unworthy a successor
We are glad to see that Mr.. Gardiner answers
the charges so much TO the point, and has not
confined himself to mere technical hair split
ting over the detailed accusations made against
him. We quite understand his indignation that
people whom he doesn't know and clergy
man who has changed his religion three times
should presume to crticse him. Indeed, It is
outrageous, But we do not see why Mr.. Gardl
ner should ask the Governor for legislation to
protect him and other public officers from such
criminal libels. Why doesn't he punish the Of
tenders himself? Indictment for criminal libel
is one Of his strong points. Whether he OBJ
tained his proficiency as counsel for eminent
generals or by jumping over elevated railroad
turnstiles or inherited It from the contemporary
OF Wouter Van Twiller we do not know But
II IS certain that Mr.. Gardeners fame az pro-
tector Of public officers from criminal libel will
last as long as the memory or the extinct mas
todon. Let him go to the Grand Jury and In
dict this Kaleidoscope clergyman and his as
socates It isn't right that they should abuse
our most sacred, venerable and picturesque In
stitutfons This is n country of rude democ
racy II is true but the line must be drawn
somewhere, and II n counsel for General Grant
whose ancestors walked the streets with Wouter
Van Twier is not entitled to protection from
ridcule and the annoyance OF charges, nothing
u.s. II this goes on somebody will be digging
open the grave Of Peter Stuyvesant up at st.
Marks or hanging FOOLS cap on CleoDatra's
Needle, and surely nobody will deny that there
are some things on which FOOLS cap is not be-
coming.