Year: 1874




The "SLANDEnER. p One of the anon.
ymous and irresponsible editers Of the
organ of the corruptionists borrows the
invective of cotemnorary-as it bor-
rows everything else which the paper
contains of public interest-against the
how and contemplate vice of slander,
and makes personal application of it
to the editor of this paper, as tie only
reply that can be made to direct specific
charges of notorious public wrongs and
GROSS immoralities affecting public de-
eency. We fully agree with the writer
of the article quoted from as to the
mean, cowardly and detestible Iature OF
xhe slanderer, the most detestible when
manifested through public print or from
the lips Of professed religious teacher;
and there is no character for whom we
have greater horror, whose example
We have more scrupaiously stunned,
NJ Of whose malice we have been more
frequently the object. During long
career in journalism, we challenge any
one to cite an instance in which we
have assailed privale reputation. med
died with the private business or domes-
tic affairs of any one, or engaged IN per
sonal controversy, except as in case OF
Guye, our veracitY is challenged on the
ground of comparison of moral char
acter with our opponent; and i'll all such
cases we defy any one to show where we
have departed an iota from the strict
letter and spirit of the truth, or said
more in the first instance than public
duty demanded. and in the second more
than our own vindication required III
exposing the moral character of an as
sailant who had used the columns of
public journal to heap obloquy upon
our private character, ill which there
vas not one word of truth or circum-
stance upon which to found charge of
the character specified.


We published tho literal facts, in
which every tax payer in the county is
interested, regarding the manner in
which the county farm was disposed of,
and for this we were assailed as a liar
and slanderer through the columns Of
the 1ntelligencer. The facts as We stated
them, in every material particular. stand
upon the public reco, ds today, undis-
puted. Who is the slanderer?


We alluded to the fact that squaw
and Chinese houses of prostitution were
kept in the heart of the city in houses
owned by one Guye. Again the editor
of the Intelligencer opened his columns
to Guye-not to defend himself, for he
was forced to admit the main facts,
which are of public notoriety-but to
assail our private character with vitu>
perative epithets and false and SANDER
GUS accusations; and when, in self-de-
fence, we showed mp the character Of
the man whose instrument of falsehood
and SANDER he was, by facts which no
man in this community has the effront-
cry to deny, he comes to the rescue Of
the "squaw man. who employs his
editorial services in defence of degra-
ded traffic, by narrowing diatribe on
the "slanderer.' and publishing in his
leading editorial column with the re-
mark: "It truthfully portravs the char
acter of the thing who edits the DIS
PATCH in this place" And concludes
the whole subject with the discreet an-
nouncement of his purpose TO abandon
the controversy. after denounc;ng our
paper as defamatory sheet" as fol-
lows: 90 As we have not yet descended
sufficiently low to notice the blackgnard
illusions to this paper in the article res
ferred to, we let it pass" This is un-
doubtedly the wisest conclusion he
could come to, as it would be impossible
for him or his employers to prove sin
gle false statement or blackguard ex-
preston in the article referred to. Who
Is the slanderer? Let the public Judge.