The weekly register. [volume] (Point Pleasant, Va. [W. Va.]) 1862-1909, 1905-04-26

We owe an apology to our read
ers for making any reference to
the articles recently appearing in
the State Gazette with the name
Of L s Echols signed to the same
We only do SO now to correct the
impression under which that
worthy gentleman seems to be
lsborlng, with reference to the ar
ticIes which were published in this
paper. We desire to say that
the articles appearing in this
paper were written and pub
lished by and under the direo
ton of the Editor. who assumes
all the responsibility for the same.
and that the Attorneys for Grover
Cremeans are in no wise RESPONSE
BILE for the same. We desire to
say further, that the Attorneys for
Grover Cremeans did not even ask
that any article be published with
reference to the case, and that they
were not advised that anything
was going to be said upon the case
The article which first appeared in
the columns of this paper with ref
erenoe to the case was given as a
matter of news. and for the benefit
of the patrons of the paper and
the public, which set forth the
facts as We were then advised, aud
as We are still advised. We are not
even now asked by the Attorneys
for Grover Cremeans to say any
thing with reference to the article
which appeared in the State Ga.
zstts under date of April 10th; we
thought though. that it would be
altogether proper to deny the
statement wherein it is charged
that the Editor of this paper was
not the author, but that it was one
of the Attorneys for said defendant,
for fear there might be some one
who would believe the same unless
it was denied.
We are very well aware that the
Attorneys who represented Grover
Cremeans does not need the COL
umns of this paper to protect them
against the assaults of MIR. Eohols.
AS SOON as the article appeared, we
made inquiry as to whether any of
the said Attorneys had left Town.
and strange to say they were all
here, the same as if nothing had
happened. Thou, EgotistI That
any one of the said Attorneys
would be coward" in thy pres
encsi We do not even think it is
necessary to reply to his article
because it consists of nothing but
abusive language, directed at the
Editor of this paper. without rea-
son, lcgic, or common sense 1t does
not attempt to discuss the merits of
the matter, which we have been con-
sidering, and the reading public
are more anxious 10 have a ques-
ton discussed upon it's merits
than they are to hearing the bark
ing of a dog or the braying of
jack ass. To say anything further
upon the subject under discussion
would simply result in repetition
of what We have before said, and
with which orr readers are already
very familiar. There never was
but two points raised for discus
sion. First, the competency of
L. s. Eohols, as a Prosecuting
Attorney; second, the right of the
County Court to employ assistants
for him. and pay them out of the
County Treasury. Upon the first
proposition, we would rest our case
upon the recent articles he has
written, because he has shown
that he is lacking in all the neces-
sary requirements of a man, such
as should fill that position; and
upon the second proposition, in
addition to what has already been
said. the columns of this paper
are open to any one who will pro-
duoe any law authorizing the
County Court to employ an assis-
tant for the Prosecuting Attorney.
That is all there is to it, and that
is all there can be made out of it
The only answer We hear is, that
the County Court has done the
like before. and that the Town
Council has done the same. It
may all be true; but We are not
aware that the County Court has
ever before paid one penny to an
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, or
that the Treasurer of this Town
has avar Maid ono NANNY To- |