Year: 1863

has placed your last paper in my
hands in which notice you are again
slandering me without cause. You
appear very angry because | permit
persons to consult me as an attorney,
and especially because | give them ad-
wise that'does not suit YOUR INTEREST.
Now what are the facts? Why John
MafIitt, for a third person paid you
ten dollars, which you denied receiving.
He applied tome for advise, stlted
his case-said he would himself swear
he paid you the money and could be-
sides prove it by q credible witness.
| told him there was no difficulty in
his case; that l had no doubt you inten-
ded to cheat him; and if you did not
fix it, to sue you and make you do so.
He afterwards told me you had fixed
it, and that was the whole matter
NV if you are as honest as you pros
fess Why insist 50 stoutly in your paper
that you willingly allowed yourself to
be wRoNGED out of ten dollars rather
than have law suit, when you know
that two honest men are ready to
swear that you got the money? Wou!d
it not be more consistent with honesty
to admit that you were in error and
say no more about it? You go on to
brag of your remarkable honesty and
challenge me boastfully to show case
in which you intentionally cheated
anybody out Of SINGLE CENT. Well,
since you BOAST and make the chal-
ienge, | point to your ':FRAUDs on the
county treasury, which | was con-
strained by duty to the public, to
expose year ago, AMI which you adj
mitted and attempted to justify M
your paper, ON the ground that you
could not live without doing so. 1t
may be comfortable to you to have the
people of Harrison county taxed from
800 to 800 per annan for YOUR
Support, but / doubt whether they
see it in that light.


You next charge that ! cheated my
uncle. Well let US see how much truth
there is in this. My uncle was sccu-
rity for my father for about $1,000.
l was myself liable for his debts for
upwards of $40, 200, on which l ex-
pected to lose and did lose from 81, 900
to $4,000. Ny uncle wanted me to
assume the debt for which he was lia-
bic and let him out. | refused to do
it. Now would you have done Others
wise?


You next say II have as an attor-
ney SKINNED almost every man have
done business for" but you make no
specifications, and for that reason it is
impossible for me to reply to you, ex-
cept by saying, as do, thatit is false,
and you know it, if you know any
thing about the matter. / have now
practiced law in Harrison county Il
years, and have been so fortunate as
to have pretty clever business. Thai
I may have differed with my clients in
O few instances as to the value OF my
services is doubtless true; but believe
have had as few difficulties Of tina
kind as any member of the bar in this
or any other comfy: My clients seen
to be satisfied, as is evidenced by theil
continued patronage; and if they art
satisfied see no reason why outsiders
should complain. have recollec
tion that YOU employed nae in two ra
cher important cases. Did | SKIN you


You next charge that 81 HUNT VI
claims against my unfortunate neigh
bors and starye their children y This
is pretty windy charge and is a
false as the other, and still you maxi
no specifications. RAsCALs, who arc
caught in dirty tricks and brought W
standing, are apt to talk in that way
about the attorneys who detect am
bring to light their frauds. They ar
always SURE that the claims have beel
"HUNrED UP" by the opposing attor
ney-and that he has or will "sKIN hi
client" A large proportion of m,
business having been against that elias
of men-men who have propensity
to steal in a fashionable way, commi
all manner of frauds, contract larg
debts which they never intend or ex
pect to pay-it is not at all re
markable that they should say som
pretty hard things against me; neithe
is it remarkable that YOU, having