| Show A FINAL ANSWER THE salt lake dibens of sunday april 20 fills a column and a half of editorial space with further scurrility and abuse of 04 the undersigner undersigned under mider signed the writer of these repeated libels has used his one talent vulgar vituperation tupe ration for several years under cover of the aanne without personal notice from the object of his assault he is too contemptible to name but for the paper which he be denies defiles and too insignificant for reply but the accusation made in the tribune on friday Is repeated in sundays issue with the additional falsehood that teat the undersigned undersigner under signed has not answered the charge that an cl arrangement had been entered into between C W penrose and marshal parsons therefore the following paragraphs are now copied from the reply which the tribune does not quote but speaks of as an effort to try to knower answer without an swerin gM the undersigned undersigner under signed so harashe far as he remembers never had but two interviews with marshal parsons and these were at the marshals MarR haPs office in relation to the de tendon of prisoners in the penitentiary after their terms had expired for costs coats when no tine line had been imposed the Mit marshal rahal ax that he could coald not do otherwise than hold them because the commitment in every case apeci specified eted imprisonment uncil the costs were paid A 4 writ of hobrecht corpus was as sued out in one of these cases meo before judge zane the detained person was wan liberated and the marshal then agreed that such persons persona should be discharged on the expiration of their the respective irrespective terms A marshal parsons never asked 0 W penrose to do anything respect respecting i the affidavit davit referred to or in regard to his confirmation or in relation to his office or the efforts to oust him he never entered into any arrange mont meat of any kind whatever with C W penrose Pen roae unless the promise to do r his duty in regard to the discharge of prisoners prisoners riso ners after their terms expire can 9 be called balled an arrangement there is not any foundation or excuse tor for the libel uttered by the tribune which was doubtless suggested suggest edby by the same individuals who nave have endeavored to intimidate persons unwilling to join in their scheme I 1 the tribune of monday bionday A april P ral 21 an attempt was reade made to smooth over a prurient libel published some time ago respect respecting ng an aa alleged occurrence in the writer of the scandal now BOW says it was one of those oases cases where a person 1 becomes convinced in his own mind while the evidence would not warrant the presumption 11 this may be the tribunes con condition ai in the present case but from the course it has pursued for several year in relation to the undersigner undersigned under signed he is of the opinion that malice and mendacity prompted this new falsehood which at the proper time and in the right place he will be found ready to deny under oath As it is iselt 88 to dispute with one who never fairly meets an opponent or truthfully states his position he will not further notice in these columns such ch personal persona calumnies calum nies hut but as heretofore will treat them with silent contempt don tempt CHARLES W |
