| OCR Text |
Show KK jlhliCI'IILMI M ITU I. AMI IHS- (UlltllOLH. IA The Logan Journal la now aiding Hw direct aud ijclf1o mUrerrctenUtlou fly to Ita endeavor to attach n piitlf-tu Wfj ' rueniilnf l utterances of the flramiT 9K Xn4thatrould not fairly li so run mSGJ itracd. Wo dip a few sentences from jHVf alerthyidlturlal attemjt to Juillly flSt the Journal lu Ha count: Ot "With all due rcsrwt tntlir Siwawe BH till hoi I that the erlklo In Iho .Saw a HlS it designed toronov the niatilnitlbat jHIVf II e Journal headline qavu lu lit 1 lit He HjB I ubllran preiMiire haa bren brouiilil to Hjnjj licar with Miimelenl forre In cauao tho B B ( kWm to liack water t aotno extent." SuBSffi "llie artlclo In qneittlon titeAnt aome MEwH thlnir, or II waa an atxur.l ihlnz V, itlaiu write It" flLfwP "Neither llriiitltcaii nor Iicmocrata WUH rnsnlrant Mtth Iho ttrcuinatanvea eir KflRir Ira ijlneil that It ha I any ilhrr nialbls SnjlJ meaning than that Llron In It by Iho rMWn Journal hea Hlnea " JBg Tho .Vru-i article la iileo clearly unfair Vjl ' In another rcaiKjct. Itlntlmatea that Ita vl atrlciuret ai plleil lo tioth iiarllm HK" " 111 tie .W contend thafllemo. HB t , rrata In lisan" have d me anythlni: tmt ".'li detcn 1 the Cliurth euthorllha aitalntt tlie !Mk wilful tiilprcnreatntAtlotiii, oftrlrky Ito- ylf fublfmna wtintn ltrw an 1 clivwhero BFH havo dellberalely alalnllhat It a the 1 1 1 1 lh of the I Iral I'rreldoncy that Inn l Iflj 1 au I Utah ahoul 1 be lUiiublleaut" LuHn TheflntiiuotatloncocUlnaan opln tuuBtf Ion eutln l unwarranteil by the aril ijEjsct clo referred to, mid a direct at-aertlon KMalp which la a porltlve and cratultoue lUflcf falsehood. Thero wai nothliiK In tho Clljt, editorial which the Journal cuted fll!"; that Juatlflrd Ita healllne ai-ettlon ''IJjV that the DumiiT s denounceil IjHi the Republican (arty, or accuied It of HV.! earrylng the Imxan tleclloti ly tlie- VBfi Kraceful methodi. Of courae ever IjHL, body hai a right to lilt opinion and Vjf every Journal ihoull lava theaatuu flfl! Ilbelt). Hut e dlapute the tilth! uf t either a Journal or an Individual to luaVn and publlih that which la utterly uutrne, In calllnr; the ntteutlou ot II. f the Journal toltaerrorln thla matter i'B B we uaed the courtery which ihould tw ftfl maintained by the prewu Wo.dealreto Wj' lunuelheaarnecoureeLow. Hut we 't'.Mt nd it ueceiaary to uie more emphatto tfiBul liuguaie, bccauie that lr aerrui liVH '' ' determined to laca ui In a fade light IIK'iI betoro the Ixignn public, lattlv "' ''Clu'''llo,, concerning Ilo- t Mil tubllcan priiturt" li luiultlnK ai ell aa falie. Ae man I Democrat! aa Itrpuhllcana cxpreiinl touadliapprovalof theournaf'a htad-liuea htad-liuea before v.o rcrptctlully dlnctcd I that iar'a attention to them. There waa no "pteaauri" or "force" o( any kind brought to ).ear upon ui. And wehavenof'taoVed water" to nu) extent. We have not withdrawn or modified h eentlmrnt or u ixprea lion conlalntd In the article which the Journal copied. Wo have on!) oljicttd to the Journul't jervrnlou of our rrnarke. (tut that terveralon waa not quite to vllo aathe illncl charge II how brlugi lo i over up Ita flrat rouK. Thero are 'olhtrlmlnuitlona In Ita lalcit utu.r-nncea utu.r-nncea on till matter that aru In the ame vein aud are tqually untrut. , 01 i ii ran "the nrtlclo In tpieallon y j meant loiuethltiK," or why wnelt o IP '-j utenalvtly copied? Hut It did not S', 7 mean an attnek on tho Reubllcan .fc tv I any or any other ptrl). It did not L'ff,v lay whatthujuruaf refrcarnleU It aa 33 r aaylriK. It meant all It aald hut not nMi what tho Juurnn! (aid It mid. Thnt lfau.1, alone waa the )iolnt of controviray T ". I with tho Journut, And the lucraMt) I'Sf 1' forourcoutlnuauceof that controvert) )iM . la Ihoyjunial'a claim of aright to thut ifjfl J mlareiriientua. Wo deny the right, Ik ff. and wodcnouuculhe imthod ly which I il 1 that pajier niprti Ita claim; that l, b) II '; furthiraud groaurr mWrepritentatlou. Ik J In reily to the third iam,rih k (fl Muoleil uIkjvo e have to lay, that no Hi f " tetibllcaii or Dimocrat cognizant mm' o( tbe cltiuiiifcloncia coull fairly H I ay that the article In quntloncarrlid II thenuai.li)Ktionve)id In thryuumi'a M bwdlluel. oupioao the alhgod faiU I wtre extctly at tvprcnont) 1 7 tiOfrtin DcmocrftU Kupiw 9 une over tcAloua ItrftitllcikiittllJ H llttwaclmr7l. iofft ihtrotn (tut the Itrrutllrau party nrrlwl Iherlccllon 1 7 illrgnict Tul ntth'Jr? imtifm Ik nodinirtoco Utwttii trioiia! actfl mi puttj rr flHjii)bl1ll;? Art- thim not M1I1U don y fttttltuni tl tt IhHr own vnrij will not provr The Dikmhi Xr.UflOIJ not prutni lu ilt-cl ! Mta llin merit! of ttie conttorirnr nr r thf niitliodihy will h tha IOin election wiidjiIJ toliiTH Utn cartlcJ. anJ we ilOjtM feet iliclhml to I pUnM lo tl v fnlla jovLtlnn which the Jvttrnat fatu nlrctcU for nu. Where hutuwe Irtknttrd thutcur "Mrlcturm iitllnl to huth artlr? I this the "Intimation" rrftrmJ tt? "The Dminrt Nm Iim not pro-cUltmJ pro-cUltmJ that tiny lnon or p'trty hat brcn ptlttjr of any uih tJlrir netful reilUodK, ant wt thvrrfora n tut attalntlthn ktatrmrnt or lnttnitlon. Or I in 1 linl aertlou that wa haTO done nnvthlniruf the kind." That ra and In our poMllon on thla matter. Wo do not "rontrnl" that "Drtnocrali Id Jogan'f have done thlft thator the Mlnr. Nor have we ad JuJted the nepubllrana of lonn CUllty of ai.hlnft dltrxcrful. The Journal la now aUenij ting to nilirep rent our j-inlton In reference to tho l)einwratF,M It did In reference to the ItepuMItaia W do net ropof tote dragged Into It quarrel nor lo l I laced In a filre lltfht Urore either nartj. The whoio tenor of the Journal' editorial rtmarkao! Wednrediy U In that direction. It lay further. "Uecr.i.not forget the aaylnff of the Church organ tint 'fnWhood la politic UrdHboo-llnrdlh.'" Tha Ulntfttlu ck-e Itft bftelctav rertlouw about the Church orgau are evldei.ee of Hifalteheoil In both. Aa to lu "rluMi," we lmo not bttfiu) tt) U luMiitfe upon one of them. tut among thera li not tho right lo mU-rejrieut, mU-rejrieut, elttier by Implication aft la theflrrtlnatancocr by dlrtit untruth m In the jrefent lntame. And thla lithe whole ftolnt of controversy with the Journal It In not whether the Itepublloan pirly or the Democratic uiity In prillty of "disgraceful raelh od." Vv havo made uo accui atlon agalitit I Ither. It U aa to the right and projrleiyof htatlng In hendlluitover our remark?, that we have made an nccutatlon wn nevtr uttered and I-nottoW fouuJ In the article ao headed. An further, of adding dl re.t untmthi to the original pcrver alon. ThU Is not "due rerpocl" nor li Itromnvm honetty. It la not proIIUhlo to continue neon troyeny with 11 dlrj utant who not only refuses to aoknonhvlge an error when It ! courteously pointed out, but fro-ceedi fro-ceedi turoakedltcct ihargea that are utterly unwarranted t y fact, an J to go even to the extcut of Judging ai to our Mrtlgra" and motive, to we will clore with the hope that the 'fopleor Ignti, of both partlen, will Judge the malteronlti merlin and not by any fcldeliiupH that lead away from tho .ui.lnqur-.Uo, 1. |
