The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1906-08-14
An Open Letter to Judge William NJ McCarty

lar assertions. which | answered ms fol-
lows, and which | now repeat;
Salt Lake City, July 10. 1906.
Hon. William NJ. McCarty, City
Dcar Sir; ] in receipt OF your letter
bearing date the 23rd uit., which hns boon
forwarded TO me from Washington. In re-
ply TO that portion OF II which ia personal
10 yourself. permit me 10 say.
have no interest. direct or indirect In the
publication called Truth and have had no
moro TO do with Its statements respecting
you. or, indeed. any other matter, than you
hnve had yourself. Your reference TO the
paper ms my personal organ iS wholly un-
warranted because wholly unfounded in fact,
And know OF nothing which could properly
give rise to such nm idea in your mind. IT.
Is likewise absolutely untrue that | have
ever sent my person or intjmnted desire
TO any person. to malign or speak i'll OF
you or anyone else, thar any person. or
nny clique or faction publication 10 nu-
thorzed TO speak for In any manner
about anybody or anything | say personally
and take the responsibility for II, and you
nor anyone else can truthfully say that
have ever carried on q political or other
contest except In tho open. | nm not rospon-
siblo and decline 10 be held responsible for
what anyone except myself may say about
You or anybody else II is quite true that
your letters about Thomas and Hobbs were
within my general invitation TO write me
with reference 10 any such matters, and
they were answered, | think. with courtesy
that copies of any answers were sent TO
others. except that copy OF ono letter
was sent to one man, not TO be shown 10
others, nor with tho suggestion that 1t should
be shown but for different purpose en-
tirely, which you are at liberty TO know II
you have any curiosity on the subject.
You seem 10 have written under some stress
OF foeling, occnsioned by an attack upon you
which you consider unjust. and / therefore
Ignore for the present certain insnuations
contained In your letter which should
nj lh1ry len a.
| did not reply to former letter of yours
because. without desiring TO be offensive bur
only TO be candid. / could not understand
upon what theory you conceived II TO be
your business 10 write me as you did, and
therefore considered that the ordinary cour-
tesles did not require me TO answer If l
should undertake TO deliver q written lecture
TO you concerning the idle gossip. the III
natured criticism, the lying scandal which
may have been busy with your own uame
from time 10 time (and you deceive your
other mon In public life with no more reason
have sufiercd) you would in my judgment
be Justified In consignng the letter 20 the
wastebasket as piece OF intolerable impertl-
nence and ill-broeding nay part. and in
advising me. II you replied at all, that my
time would be more satisfactorily employed
In attending to my own affairs and under
taking TO correct my own shortcomings.
However, that Is purely matter OF taste and
you are welcome TO your own Views On the
subject
II have overlooked any matter In either
OF your letters In which you are personally
concerned | shall be very glad at any time
TO discuss II with you Yours very truly,
GEORGE S..iinRLAND.
Let me suggest to you land the advice
is as free as salvation) that perhaps If
you would attend TO the duties Of your
own office little more diligently and
poke a somewhat obtrusive nose into
other peoples affairs n little less fire.
quently, you might escape 4 good deal
OF unpleasant criticism, as ninety-nine
out of every one hundred judges In the
United States do escape 1t.
You have seen 1T, apropos of nothing
apparently, to review some
what elaborately some incidents Of my
political career: and sometimes you have
spoken with reasonable accuracy and
sometimes you have drawn upon your
imagination or the imagination Of
others. I do not regard it as important
TO discuss these matters with Won No