OCR Text |
Show WHY NOT KETBACT MANLY? The Enquirer possibly realizes that 1 1 lna too far, for its own interests, in its indiscriminate abuse of the Dem viatic party, and in last night's issue its head tries to make an apology which its heart (?) has no part in. It . ays : "We have Ylcarly shown that this paper has n-vtr sought to apply one Miigle unkind epithet t our local Democrats." Dem-ocrats." Then, what in the name of common sense does the following sentence mean : "The party of secessonists, free-trad-t-rs, socialists, anarchists, and bummers bum-mers is not the party to which the jwoj.le of Utah will attach themselves. "Protection"" against all such classes is what the Republican proposes to establish in this country. hnquirer, ..Inly 7." Here there is no exemption made of .ur local Democrats, and in its next issue it adds HOUSE-THIEVES to its infamous category of appellations. And now it tries to sneak out of the position, by accusing this paper of "misconstruing and misrepresenting its writings and motives." This is false. We simply paralleled its own utterances, and if its object was nt to viilify and malign its opponents, sigainst whom it could not justly bring any specific charge , what could ilbo ject be? No doubt its maxim; was: Throw plenty of mud, some of ii will always stick. |