Historical Newspapers of South Carolina

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

BY E. B. MURRAY & CO. ANDERSON, S. C., THURSDAY MORNING, AUGUST 5, 1880. YOLTJME Xyi ---NO. 4 A LrSTTfi?.QN ^THE LATE DUEL, CAPT. IT. lu DePASS KXPCAINS AMD DEFENDS DIS COIJS3S. 12? InOffiuuiti that He U la any tb? Death ot Col. io IniputaUku? .fl^uaible for OT). CAMDEN, 8. C., July 20. Tb //ic Editor of the Newt and (fourier : lu my letter bf July 10. asking for a suspension of public opinion, I said in response to'tho communication of J. C. H. that I waa preparing a statement for the public which would vindicate me in the minda of the most doubtful from any responsibility for the death of the deeply lamented Col. W. M. Shannon ; - that while it was not commenced with that view, fer I never for a moment- enter tained the thought that any person what ever would lay at my door so horrible a charge, yet it would effect that result. I propose now to give that statement, and wilt say right hare that it will not only do what I have said, but will en tirely exonerate me from the borriblc charge io the minds of my bitterest ene mies: ayo more, in tho minds of thoie who have been most busy and energetic in'trying to build up a public opinion ngaimt.me.-by-whlcb they.iutended to I foroverdrag^krW-arid -ikJtrby ?n hon orable reputation that I have labored j-o \?WQ BO faithfully and BO earnestly to buildup in thia community, (a commu nity where 1 was born, waa raised, and havo spent all of my days,) that the sacred heritage of a name synonymous, with tr?th.nt;d honor transmitted to mo by a lather beloved and respected wher ever known, should at leant receive at my gained by tho firm determination to do and act right under all circumstances. This preface might indicate that tho opinion of your correspondent was well founded, sine* after my return I take occasion to express myself so warmly and so feelingly, but if tho ?ratified express-1 ions of opinion at my- early' return from ull c'.aesea In this community ia any in dication that no auch public indignation ever existed, (but that it-was confined to those pf foy bitterest enemies whose pur-'?? nose was io evident to destroy me,) then I might content myself to let the matter rest here, endorsing whatever my friend Col, Blab ha? said in my vindication du ring my abscm-e., though I have neither read or heard, at thk ".riling, his com munication. * Much, however, is due to my friends and 'thoao who h?ve' not boori hasty in their judgment, and to an impartial public, that my connection with this en tire matter should be given, and with this view alone I publish it. .. Bobert G.-Ellerbe made a confession of ' judgment tb Mrs. Allen E. Cash fur the ' sum of $15,020.25, a sum sufficient to cover all of his property, both real aud Eterama!, under which, if bis property ind been cold then, would have remained nothing to (satisfy a subsequent judgment recovered;against bim by C. M. Wiengca fortb?frutrt pf $2,000. Upon tho appli cation of our client, Mr. C. M. Wiengca, Col. Shannon and myself, as his attor ney?, concluded to institute proceedings in the Courts to set'aside' this cbnfessiou of judgment^ This proceeding was in st i tuted by summons and complaint, and is'f? ?be Handwriting of Mrs. W. L. .. DoEusa^xcept the signature of Conrad ' M. Wienges, our client, who swears to tho {riitb thereof1 before tats, -?W iNotary iublio ??t?ber 29,-1079? ' Vff}JwB* read over by me to Col. Shannon and ap proved of by him; I th?? applied for the injunction before bis Honor T. J. Mackey, at Chester, 81X?Z who, upon the grounds piUlBfein Mt^^jgranted tho Mini? "Novemb?r 1,1870." The' o ni er was signed in triplicate. This original sum mons and complaint was tiled in the Clerk's office November 7, 18/9, and bas never been taken out by either bf the attorneys since that day, except perhaps when it waa used upon the trial of the eise at the February term of tho Coull 1880, and it waa then iri the custody Of tho Clerk of the Court. When.the injunction waa granted and nighed by Judgo Mackey, aa aforesaid, rVirrc rons no such clause either in the mar gin-or the body of the complaint as the fot' lowing : " The plaintiff'further all?gea that the taid; pretended1 cqnfe?st?n of judgment has been made by the said defendant, Rob ert G. Ellerby to Mi own Bitter, toho is the said Allen E. Cash, and thus by a family but to tho contrary was purposely.nqil. . iutentionaily ex?tbqed th er o fi o, very reason 6t. its possible construction otherwise than it was ioteuded to be, as tho l equel will most conclusively show. When I first prepared tho complair - T. drew, up what all careful lawyers do .n caaos ot importnncoj moro especially those involving now and undecided legal propositions, based upon facta which re quire careful and exact statements, what may bo termed a rough or original drafty Thia draft comprised "tho grounds of ac tion, the prayer for injunction and judg ment, with an affidavit of tho truth of tho allegationsB!!p?cssd to bo sighed by Cwtirad M. Wienges, our client, before mo as Notary Public, with tho names of W. M. Shannon and W. L. DePaas, .plaintiffsattorneys, covering which was a summons addressed to tho four defend ?T?Tnttf,' signed inside, and endorsed with . thoaarpe names of plaiptifFa attorneys, ?sTB }ttiar|ep VfWglnal /Bu mmons," with 'complaint hnnbx'2a, all of which was in cu.* hnn/lmrltini? /la ar, .;\f?<?r.thniiD*ht the marginal cloute waa pl iced on the Vast. sheet of thia rough adroit, and ut thc time iiitqr^tiJtojriiBfer. exclusively1 to ibo de fendant Tsllcrbe, and to him only, in a purely legal sense. So any lawyer would c<iusi-4?r, especially when taken in con nection with the prior allegations set birth therein. When, however, tho original tummont and complaint rta* prepared, thia margi nal clause being .?'-archilly examined was alni? that at tho time this confession Sf judgment waa made by Robert G. Ellorbo to Min. Cash that abe was ignorant of the fact, I determined that'afc 06 allusion lind been mide to her In thc prior allegations ot tnd?ohgb draft/and the; this might be IHI tn iseonst! jed despite my intention, , f?n<* ^ *f* "id and belief , tba certificate ^of Judgo Mackey (which is herewith published) CM a hi ?shes beyond a doubt: WASHINGTON, D. C., July 12.1 Metropolitan Hotel. J I certify that 1 have read tho. com plaint in tbe caseJSJ@cfc&$ M. Wiengca, plaintiff, against Robert G. Ellcrbo, Al len E. Cash, John Doby, as Sheriff of Kershaw County, and John M. ' Tindal, aa Shtriff of Sumter County, defendant*, that the complaint' -was in Hie hand writing of aji?d.v>.wbich Capt. jP'-Posa Informed mtPWtW-hU wife'?; th..; upon tho ?aid complaint and for tho reasons therein stoled I grunted an injunction reatraiu?D? tbs said Sacrifia .Abd^^other defcodonfirtga ft?Uog th*?ir?. bulb noland^peraonAl, pf tho defendant, ;EUerbe, tfor??^r il,ylfc7j9. I further certify that traen 7 granted the order of injunction In said case, upon motion of the plaintiffs counsel, W. L. DePasS, ?v?q., there was no such marginal clou?e as flfclKawfl? fCgThat further th? plnlnti??'.'dlc^e j that ?!?o pretended con fessions of judgment htvJ been made by the said defendant, Robert O. Ellcrbe, to his own sister, who is tho said Allen E. Caeb, and thus, by a fariily al rangement, the said defendant Intends to defeat tho recirVjery pf tito p|a1htifij'>et forth in,the said'complaint, either in the body or margin or said -compl-inta -.: - kr I further certify ri addition to~ th? ab sence of said clause from either in the margin or body of snjd, complaint, tbat after I Had signed said order of injunc tion, the samo having, been signed in triplicates, that the following conversa tion . occurred, Jretween t JV. . ii. DePass, Esq., and myself : I asled the said W. L. JDePass if Mrs. Cash was anv relation to the defendant Ellerho. l?e replied that 'sha was his sister. I tuen .remarked you ought to have stated that fact iu the complaint with her knowledge of the confession of judgment. That said Do Pasa replied that he had set forth the facu? in the margin of the original draft of tho complaint, but believing that Mrs. Cash was ignorant of the fact at the time the confession of judgment h.\d been made to her by ber brother, that while he had put it tuero he had left it out of tho original complaint as sworn to be cause lt might lend to misconstruction. I then replied if be.thqught so it was "emin?ntly proper.'* ? T. J. MACKE^,' Circuit Judge. ? desire, however, to say here that .while I did-purposely and, intentionally refrain from in: thin ? ivginal clause of.lh'i draft. ..rtho'eomphnnt into the original summons and complaint, yet I do not acknowledge hy so doing that I did not have the clear professional right to do so'. In tho plain discharge of a pro fessional duty to my client, without ques tion from any one, if I lind thought that it was a-/amity arrangement} but at l/te (ruth it I did not think it wat an arrange ment with which Mrs. Cash had anything to do. and furthermore as I then believed, and do now, that sho was ignorant nf inc fact at tho time of sdeh a ooqfessibn of ?udgmeut having bRan" mftde to "fier by ?or brother, out of the Bincero and gen uine respect that I entertained for her as a lady, and for that regard I felt for, ?bo feelings of a husband, I did refrain from what would'have- been, with my belief a gratuitous ip?altV This was my motive tn excluding.the clause, and no miscon Htruction'by any rnhn'at my saying so will provest mo from expressing what is the truth. It was for this reason that Col. Shannon so earnestly assured Gen. Cash in his letter to him of tho 25th, that he knew arid was confident' that I did not tay or intend to tau anything that would impute fraud to Mrs. Cash in the sense that he (Gen. Oath) had applied it. Both these papers, tho rough draft and the originnl complaint, ?.re identical ia every particular, except the rough draft is id my handwriting, has the "marginal clauso abd ih hbt sworn to "by n?y' client, Conrad M. Wienges, but appears to be no before me as Notary Public, and for convenience was intended to be used to copy from, leaving out the marginal clause/ whereas tho original complaint is in the handwriting of Mrs. DePass, is sworn to by our client, Conrad M. Wien ges,-who-signed tho samo before mo m Notary Public, and has not the marginal clause,-' njir Js> th? C1Q?SO in .the Qojdy thereof. ! Both * aro covered by sum monses identical in every particular, and right hera it was i by reason of this out ward similarity that a moat unfortunate mistake was'mado bv mo on i'ulesday, November 3, 1879. by s|$?f$>n the Sheriff this 'rough draft coveredup in ita summons with the order of injunction inutead of the originnl complaint with it? summons, the reason being that -he Sheriff, who waa entitled to copies, said to me that Qen. Cash was in town and wanted to Bee the papers upon which ! had obtained the injunction, and thA il ? would let him have the origin tl sum' mons and complaint for a day. or twe upon which I had obtained the injune timi ho would relieve mo of making copies, and as aforesaid th ough mistake (instead of the original summons nm complaint upon which I had Obtained the injunction) served on him this rougt draft in its summons. These he bandet to Gen. Cashy who, in turo,.took thcin-ti his attorneys, Loitner & Dunlap. Thu: ile?. Cash ?? this marginal ci:uihOt.n?( hems m a pa|,cr th--? f.ummciis Ej ragfll .... i marked original, signed andTipfcn rently Bworn to, ho supposed to bo mich :.ml 'doubtless bia lawyers thought like Thia mistake I did not dlscover.lfo several days, and before I did so, ovei obtained tho napers froth j Gen. Otwh' attorneys, had, tc 'copy made nf them serving it ' upon' tile said attorneys i ti.1 that time never,for(a;moment thinkin; ?Lo examine (hoi napers so served fay mis take, or oven the copy when made, bc causa not for one nioment.did; J dooli their'correctness. After disordering th mistake, I at once filed the originnl Bum mons and complaint, withdrew from Ger 'Gash's attorneys:tho copy served and sot stituted a copy of tho original, summon and complaint, upob which 'I- had 'ot fained tho injunction, as the certificate < Judge Mackey will show was In' .th handwriting of Mr?. DePass, end did r,? contain the marginal clause referred ii ;npr ^nyj such ?Isnpe in fthe? body? of I th |enn?falajnvl ?hescfcrtlficat?s ojtljb Cler of the Court, the Sheriff and Mcssr Tjoitner & Dunlap all prove what I ha\ beru asserted, and I cannot help froi exprejshlg my thitnko to thee gtntlemc ?for their publication f ?dd'ihstc&i-of ? C. H.'s assertion that they placed me 1 an awkward position, I find that they ai absolutely necessary for my vindicatio They alt show that tho paper I served c the cheri ff is not tho paper how bo -3 in the Clerk's office ; they all show tb the paper served on the Sheriff wss i my handwriting, and that there was \ thq dArgVSftf Ut&t}> plaint further olleros ?nat, tho pretended ~'co fesslon of judgment has been made 1 the said defendant, Robert G. Ellcrbe, his own sister, ?rho is the said Allen ! (lash, abd thus' by a family arrangeme the said defendant intends to defeat tl recovery of the plaintiff," whereas i tl paper now on file does not centaine aforesaid clause either wt the margin > ??^Jf Mackey docs show tjttwI^CT n?l'summons and complaint, (tiled ?h V Clerk's office for Kershaw Count/,) is the handwriting nf Mrs.' DePass, and w the complaint upon which the injune*! was granted, the Mme being signed ' triplicate. In a conversation with Col. Watta, Lauren? C. II., in Charleston, 8. ? about the. 10th of March, ho asked me relate the causo of my difficulty wi Gen. Co*h. 1 answered, in some si prise, that I had no such difficulty, t would not he candid if I did not info: him that I had hoard that tba Gene Was deeply offended st abino expressif, contained in the margin of s ; pai which bo had accidentally : seen, I which did not form a patt of tb? j> ceedlngs, and were not in the origil ?ummons and complaint ; that the tx flit Uto ??*Ud br ine) Iba t&tV ?ol. Shannon knew nothing about it. Ho I seemed to think that was not the cause | of offeooe, but something that occurred at the trial pf tho case, either in the ar gument or tho examination of the wit- ! neates. I disowueti any intention of| imputing fraud to Mrs. Gash, and told him if he would read th* complaint I waa satisfied bj would ic? Utrnt there wai no disrespectful allusions to Mrs. Cash, aa I had studiously avoided making .any, cud likewise so had Col. Shtmiicn, my associate, and with'that view had left out the objectionable marginal clause in the complaint for fear it might be. miscon strued. At his request I sent bim copies of the original summons add com^'aint and Judge Kershaw's decree. And wheo I met him again afterwards in Columbia. April 22 or 23, he told me that he had seen nothing in tho complaint disrespf ct ful to Mrs. Cash ; that no far as Ellerbe was concerned it might bo different, and that ho had so*written to the General,, and 'told bim' that lt was nono of his funeral, provided cherri was nothing out side either in the argr.mont or examina lion of witnesses at the trial of the cause, which he tbe> seemed to think waa the I cause of trouble. From this I inferred that Gen. . Osb'W&s offended at some thing that occurred at tho trial, and though I mentioned tho fact of these conversations to Col. Shannon, speaking of Col. Watta o? i iy friend, for 1 believe that ho hts kindly feeling? fn* mo, I did not of course say to Col. Shannon what j I thought the cause of offenco was, for] as A fact I did not know, therefore I could not say what it was. Col. ' Shannon speaks of this matter in his letter of June I ?,1880; but one thing I did certainly say to him, that Col. Watts know from these conversations that all responsibility for the marginal clause devolved u pou mo, though the matter was accidentally seen by Geo. Cash ; Col. Watts, however, dfd not seem .to think thal had anything to do with Gen. Cash's cause of offence then existing. Tho letter of Gen. Cash to Col. Shannon of November 24, 1879, in which he specifies the marginal clause above mentioned as the ground of his thon existing cause of offence. 2d. Col. Shannon's reply of November 24,1879, in which ho truthfully and justly dis claims all knowledge of this marginal clause, and of its erasure from tho saiu complaint. 3d. Gen. Cash's answer to Col. Shannon's reply dated December 1, 1879, in which he expresses himself as "perfectly satisfied with Col. Shannon's disclaimer, and grateful io know that there \ is no came for an interruption in the friend ly relations that existed between them," show conclusively that Col. Watts was right when, in the conversations I bad with him iq Charleston and Columbia, first in March and then in April last, that this waa not then the causo of Gen. Cash'a complaint. This ia further veri fied by a conversation between Col. Shannon and myself, held iu bis office the latter part of November, 1879, and before Gen. Cash's answer to Col. Shan non's reply of 25th, 1879. I had beard on the cars from a friend, on my way home from Columbia, that Gen. Cash had been deeply offended at certain ex pressions he bad seen in some of the papers in the case, at tho same timo this friend assured me he bad-been Inpart instrumental in settling this matter, Tbo noxt day 1 called on Col. Shannon at his office, told him what had boen said to me the day previoc3, and asked him if he had heard anything of. it j ho replied very pleasantly, "Oh',' yes, Col. Cash h?d written him a letter, and ho had re filied:" thereupon he read Gen. Cash'a etter to me and parts of his answer, especially that part vindicating . mei Now, 1 bad before then montioned to Col. Shannon bow the mistake bad been made by which Gen. Cash saw this mar? ginni clause, and again repeated to him tho whole matter, including the conver sation I bad with Judge Mackey ofter ho had granted the injunction, as set forth i'd the Judge's certificate, and tbon said I would write to Gen. Cash and acquaint him with bow .IK mistake was made, aud that no 'such marginal clause was in the original summons and complaint. Col; Shannon atones replied "ibero is no use in that ;" saying that "I have fully satis fied Gen. Cash about the matter, and while I told bini that I kuow nothing about it, yet I fully vindicated you." Tho Colonel seemed to be a little hurt at the thought I mighi suppose he had not been generous enough .while defendi?, biimc?f to'try and relieve mb and that Billi fob lid it necessary tb write myself. Seeing this ebullitiou of feeling, and de sirous Of fit-curing him hov/ much I did appreciate what bo bad done, I did speak of bis action (as he says in bia letter of Jane 5,188QU) in complimentary terms,1 assuring hurTal.^? saine'time tbat os ho thought writing to Gen. Cash on my part unnecessary-'that I would bot do so. Tc] provo conclusively that upon thia matter thcrd wore several and frequent conver sations between Col. Shannon and myself, Col. Shannon himself furnishes it. Again quoting from his letter of June 5, he saya : Tbo cause went up to the Su* prctnoGonrt, bed I'had -then - rio idea of any offense having been token until about tho lhth May. "Capt. DoPass on his return from the Supreme Court told me he had twice seen Col. Watts, who he Bald was a friend of bis, who told bim tbat Gen. Cash and Mr. Ellcrbe wore de termined to hold tts to account, and ho, Capt DePass, thought it his duty to in form me of iv, though ibo cause of offense watt not referred to." Any - one will see' why' I did not 'refer to tba cause of offense, for I did cot know what it was, at basti could onlv infer from these con vctsaiiouo with Col. Watta that it was something that occurred at the trial, but what it was be did not say, and therefore I did not know and could riot tell Col. Shannon. But this fact is conclusively shown, that Col. Shannon did not for a moment suppose that it waa the marginal clause, nor old I for tbat matter, and cer tainly could not think so from what Col. Watt? bad-said.'-Now let ?ny candid mind turn to tho challenge! oenfrby Gem Cash ib me'and Wilt. Ellerbe to Col. Shannon, and he. will thon see that os to myself 1 om held! .responsible for this "marginal clauno," but with the view then that ri badi Withdrawn it from tho original complaint, bot aa to Col. Shan non, '"'if ik for alleged conduct in!, ?hi man anftnent nf (hf i?*??? flt UiS tfisi thst con stituted the offerts* ai then existed." Tb OB it will appear that, this marginal clauso waa not the subject or cause of this fatal duel, and if there, ls still any doubt of Gen. teotiyrcptfrt? ?i by EUcrbe, a? the cause Offense at Coi.. Shannon 1 which did result in t/te fatal duel ; for he says further in the'tome Utter .?- "After dis claiming.in the m?U poitioe^ %v any intention to charge Mrs. Cash fr?ua, you went into the Churl anti did all Ja your Sower to establish a case of fraud against er." I may hero parenthesis and say that I did not suggest any question? pro pounded by Col. rioannon to tho witness, nor for that matter did I bear arty ques tions propounded by Col. Shannon to tbo witness that Impugued the character of --:-1-'-r' ' ! 1 Bin. Cash. We made argumenta in Ute . case and discussed, of course, tue lesa) fraudulence of toe confession bf Judg ment. Bul if Gan. Cash had been tu tho Court House at the time, he would hot have heard one word from either Co!. Shannon or myself.connv'cting Mrs. Cash with even legal fraud, or referring to ber in any way as having any. knowledge of it at the time it won (nado. 1 Where, I ask then, ls the proof taut J. C. H. has to offer that after making this charge of fraud against Mrs. Cash that ? thee denied it, and Butlered my friend and associate te bo killed rathe:1 than assume the responsibility of my own acta? This trumped up charge and out rageous slander into which he bas been ' led by my enemies is apparent, when it is ?bown that the fatal duel was not caused by this marginal clause, hut by subsequent alleged conduct of Col. Shan non in tho management of tho cause at its trial. To many of my friends and other per sons was the origin of this marginal clause known, and bow by mistake it came to be in apy poper at all, though not In any way connected with the case. Upon the application of my friend. Cel. Blair, I furnished a full and complete statement of the whole matter in writing, to be nsed at his discretion ; also a simi lar statement to Mr. J. T. Hay, lo be published in the event I fell in th? duel with Gen; Cash, both of which exon erated Col. Shannon, and to mau\ others mado verbal .statements, uever for ono moment holding bim In any way respon sible for the matter, nud yet but two men were entitled to know anything e.". all about it; These two were Gen. Cash and Col. Shannon. Thc ?ormer, because it was deemed by him as reflecting upon his wife, and the latter because be, ns tho associate attorney, had a right to know of any matter that.had been inserted into the coso by mistake or otherwise. As to the former bo certainly knew I was tba author, for be held mo to account for it, and gladly would I have given at any time this explanation in full if ho bad allowed mb the opportunity to do so, but when be sent me n peremptory challenge bc forever sealed my mouth, and it is now only forced open hy the insidious suggestions cf a man who, unknown tb me and a stranger in this community, bas been taken advantage of and bound ed on by some of my bitterest enemies to build up a public opinion ogaiust me for the purpose o I destroying my reputation'. Up to the doy of bis death the relations of Col. Shannon towards me were undis turbed ; not for one moment did he over complain, or was ever heard by any one to do so, of any_ want of fair denling upon my part. Ho knew that I had been called to account hy Gen. Cash for these very worde, in this marginal clause, Gen. Cash insisting that I had withdrawn tho charge, ho being ignorant at the limo, however, of. the real state of facts. . Does this show that Gen.-Cash waa ignorant of who was the suthoriHrrren-h? htd'stimV moned me to mortal combat oh: accduojb of it? But if there remains the possi bility of a doubt upon thia point in the mind of tay bitterest and most malignant enemy, Col. Shannon himself in his ? last utterances before his lamented death, in his letter of June the 6th. 1880, gives to it a lasting and most positive refutation. Here is hw language: "Iknow Capt De Pass's explanation of this marginal clause, bul while hi? explanation exonerates me en\ tirely. it is properly a mutier for his own justification, and.therefore I have no right to Intrude further than I did lu my reply to Gen. Cash, in which it will be obi served that although hurriedly written, that letter do?s entire justice to Gen. Cash, and to Capt. DePass, with the lighh then before me, and also to preserve thc first status of the law." Now does no) this show that Col. Shannon, when h< wrote his letter of November 26th, 187ft to. Gen. Cash, had received from me ad explanation of how1 this marginal clause came to be accidentally seen by Gen, Cash, for that ho expresses when no e?yt "by the lights then before him." Bot'ht naya further: "Moreover, so far aa I know. Capt, DePass has never beet called on to explain, and therefore I cnn not refer to that matter, os lt ;a peculiar ly apd exclusively his." Nov/ I ask anj candid mind if this doos not show thai Col. Shannon received from me the his tory of this mnrginnl clause, which hi says was peculiarly mine,:and does ni not so state in his letter to Gen. Cash o: November 25, 1879, cr.d thai ii was al my doing, and while assuring Gen. Casi that "he was sure and was confident tba I, as the regular attorney, said and mean to say nothing that would bo regarded a a charge of fraud in tho sense you (ho deemed it as npplieable," Ae ytt did nc assume one pankie of responsibility upo himself. The roply of Gen. Cash to Co! Shannon's anrvrer also shows that he wc satisfied with his disclaimer, and wit the information imparted thal I wa? iii author of the clause, a fact with which h was already acquainted, for he bad bee informed by bis own attorneys that th papers served on Sheriff Doby were I my handwriting, xnis fact by mo. wa also positively stated to Col. Watta, Get Cash's friend, as early as March los with the further fact that Co). Sbanno ?knew, nothing of it. J Again, - when m friend, Mr. W. E. DoLoache, bore to ra friend, Col. Blair, a certain lotter mi tunlly addressed to Gen. Cash and rd] pelf, (a similar ono having been borne b Capta. Clyburn and Clark to Gen. Cash who passed tho night at uen. Cash's re idence, mentioned that tho margim clause when put there by Capt. DePai was hy mistake seen by Gen. Cash in ge tins hold of the wrong paper. Be wi answered if ii was the intent tn&uitetii, m to speak of Col. Blair, who showed tl same to prominent gentlemen of Che terfield Couti Houso, and J. T. Ha Esq., and Col. Stobo Carlington, of Lai rens Court House, who had written stat menta as aforesaid, Capt. Wm. Clybur .Capt Clark, G?n., Kennedy, Mr. Jas, ) DoLoache, Mr. S/C Clyburn, Mr. J. \ DePass ?>i. Legar?; and several* otb gentlemen, to whom I mentioned hot by a mistake Gett. Cash had seen tl marginal clause, never for one thorne alluding lit any way to Coli Shannon r (he KU thor, but on th? contrary. Now ask if, in the light of all these facts, cu any man say I ever concealed the fa that I was the author of tb?- margin clause, or failed to exonerate v" 1. Shs non of any knowledge of it, when I ! himself, of all others, said and knew tb I did not conceal it ot fail td oxonert him? Ab, be was too honorable a noble a man to ever bare said br ev thought of such a toing. And X ra say here, in conclusion, rhat Gr?? ulo knows what wera the feelings of i heart when I heard, for the first tfn that a duel hod been fought In whl Col. Shannon had been killed; how fe? fully shocked I was, for I repeat he most solemnly and truthfully, that I h not tho slightest knbwledgo that he * about to engage hi a duel with Gi Cash, nor do I suppose any ono hod thu community, except those to whoa was most secretly entrusted. I again i that the most pleasant and cordial rc lions possible between men differing much In age existed between Col. Shi non and myself to the day of his des and if he could speak from the grave day ho would with Indignation slor: rebake BO unjust a charge as has been ?ade against me. As tor myself, tho veneration abd esteem I entertained for him long silice deepened into strong and abiding affection. I had that regard for bim that a junior f~s!s&r hi? ddest brother when ha appears to .bim as tbs type of noble born principles, high ard dignified courage; chaste and Incorrupti ble manhood. Tloved bid warm and gen erous heart, full of deep sympathies, his unocmpromislog detestation for all that iras mean, tow and vicious. And he knew that ho had no moro devoted friend in this world ?baa I, and I km *t that he reciprocated tho warm ? feelings <i,f -SST be?U towards him. I know too that he iras my friend, and: all the ?lander that has-been ' heaped opon me by the- few bitter-enemies I have here wlU net pre vent nie from honoring his memory and deploring his death, and from feeling for those ho ba? left behind him the deepest and tenderest- sympathies. Very trviy, yoor obedient servant, W. L. DKPASS. London a Lo ag Way Ahead. The four largest cities in the United 3tates, New York, Philadelphia, Brook lin, and Cbhf<go, have a total population af 3,118,084. In 1870 their population was 2,311,290. They haye, therefore increas ed about n third in the ten years. .If they keep np this rate of wrowth ten yearn lon ger, their total population in 1890 will be over four million, or an average of mil lion each. Yet now tho population of these four cities, of whose growth we ar so proud, taken together, lall short of the popula tion of Loudon alone. Even ii we Added St. Louis, we should not make up io many people as London contains. If we put in Washington also, wo get an aggregate population about equal to tbat or London. -: London, therefore, contains about ns , many people as New York, Philadelphia, > Brooklyn, Chicago, 8t,Louis, and Wash-! Ington together. Though tho latest cen ms of that city waa taken eight years ago its increase bas been carefully estimated, ind the population ia now put at 8> 520,868, a .total which is probably with in .tho-actual figures. The aggregate population of the six . American chics which we have named is 3,050, 684. And eveu ten yearn from now, if Londoa ?ontipucs to.grow at the rato of increase which it hos shown during the last eight pears,Jfc wiil have a population equal to that of our four greatest cities put togeth ?r. It will contain over four millions sf people.. Thesa comparisons aro not only inter' ?sting ;' Abey* aro valuable aloo. They may tend to subduo a boastful apirit not jncommon in pew and growing countries, ind they helpus to form some conception >f tho magnitude of '.be greatest city the world b<? ever aeon. Assuming a eonticuance of its present rate of increase for a century to come, some English writers have imagined London os swollen to a capital of more b?n ten millions population. 1 Eut lhere is no warrant for any sucb estima to, for history teaches that great cities evidently reach the limit of their growth,and there liter ahow a decline. Wben that ?pe dod will be attained by London, however, is beyond tho reach of anything Ilkv safe calculation, but the indications nm that it will- have been passed before the next century io over. : ' Add to New York the continuous pop ulation which really belongs to if a metropolis, and at the opening ot tho next century we 6hall hava a population IS large as that of London now, provided t?rrate of increase for ten years pastis rept? up for twenty yean longer. It Is, therefore; at all improbable, indeed, il ls very probable, that long before thc rwentieth- century is ended the clustei >f cities Of which New York is tho nu il eua will contain ' .nore people than an? ?ther city in the world. But for a quar ter of a century to come London mus! take the lead, t>d continuo to have r population equal to that of any other twt )f the great capitals, Moreover, the perpetual aggrandizemenl )f great cities cannot be an unmixed bless ?ag to any country. CAUFIELD A ?iBLE-Bununn.-W< learn on what we deem good ?uthorit] bat there is, or should bc, on: filo in. tbi War Department a letter from a Rev Mr. Bayliss, during the war a cbaplaii in ono of the Union regiments of Ken tucky, demanding an allowance for. re pairs, on account of injuries done to tb southern Methodist church at Catletta burg, Ky., by tho Forty-second Ohio reg! aient, whoso Colonel nt that time (1862 iras James A. Garfield, now Reppblicai candidate for tho Presidency. This el lowance, the facts in tho case being plait' was granted, In connection with thi mutiiatiori of'tho church In question,' i is moreover slated that Col. Garfield al lowed bia regiment to perpetrate an oui rage Which included even the burning c tho Bible and hymnbook bf the Bland o the ground that it 'was a Souther Methodist church. There ara responsibl Kitlcmcn, clergymen sud others, c tlcttaburg, who aro familiar with th Bvents herein referred to. We do.-'n< think, on the whole; tbat Mr. Garfield chances for tho presidency, slight as .he MO, would be much ' improved ambo Christians if H wetb generally know that during tho war be w? associated i any .way with oo wanton.on.?ct as buri lng Bibles and hymn-books. Between Bible burner like Mr. Garfield and righter of men like Hancock, it is m lWTwmlt;to decida aa to which should r seivoibe chaplet of tho brave.- Was, ington Gazette, i How HE i FELT.-Some weeks sine while a ptu.'y of Detroit surveyors. we running a railroad Uno in Indiana tl turvey carried them, aero? a cemeter En course of the survey o small stake w driven in a gravo, and before lt waar moved and carried .ahead, a lathy, loi legged Hoosier overhauled the me pulled off bis cos.', and danced around he yelled ont "Show me the man tb lated drive that stake In that grave." ^We are going to remove it," quiet replied one of tho porty. "I don't care if you are-show me tl man." "Well, I em the man, and what are y going to do about it?" said the big m sf tba lot, as he stepp-vl ont. "Didn't you know that was my wif grave?" asked the Hoosier with a cc liderablo fall of hts voice, "No air." "Well, it is, air-my first wife's gravi "And what eftbat f'? ~i< "What of that 1 Why-why slr, il hadn't married ? eecond one; about month ago, and kinder forgot my gri I'd take a stick and pin you to the fer with it I It's lucky for you feilen mighty lucky fer you- that I dont f half as bad as I did." j*_. . _ --Paris bas 865 miles of paveciwei Stone blocks are nsod on 264 miles, t asphalt on nineteen miles. The Ma dam has been abandoned on account the expense cf maintaining it in g< order and the impossibility of keeping freo from mud or dost. AN OW? SUIT REYIYED. A *rot>*t?lllty th?* T?H? F?hlte trtU Cet s, Glimpse oftheShcrt?St tprottanawhleb. Bom? lAwjrcra Roo?1 Hov? to tuteo. AYIM and Gwnto. COLTJMDIA, July 86. : ' Hie caso of the State of8outh Carolina Lgainat Corbin & Stone,Jtootrlal of which iva? commenec? in the Court of Common Plea? boro today, Jutfge H?daon pro dding, proraiera to be long and' interest ing. There does not seem to be tony very ?anguiue hopes of recovering the $28,000 which the counsel have pocketed i ri the way of tees, for the reason that neither of Ibo defendants aro known to havo any thing taogiblo tn tho way of asset?, but the pleadings of the evidence will doubt less throw some light lipon what baa heretofore been considered a very.dark ind mysterious transaction. THE HISTORY .OF THE CABE, The suit against Corbi arose -upon the collection by Corbin & ?tono of cer tain phosphate royally from tho Oak Point Mines In 1876. Corbin & Stone, lt seems, were employed by. tho State, Chamberlain being Governor, to under take the BUit agaiuBt tho comp to ^ re cover the amount Of royalty al foged tb have been due the State. Tho mill waa commenced on the 5th of Jul j-, 1874, and >n the 11th of November they recovered ?odgmcnt for $28,000, which amount was Eid to Corbin & Stone by the Osk Point ining Company. Out of ibis amount th? Stale claims that $8,740 was duo to Corbio A Stone as counsel fee, and that the balance, $24,200. belonged to the State? Corbin ?Ss Stone, however, paid to the State treasurer $200.08 nr.d claimed tho balance as their fees. Tho suit is therefore brought to recover 924,068.04, with interest from thc 11th of November, 1874, and cost. . The v'sfendants in their ?nower admit the receipt of the $28,000, but declare that Stone retired from the firm in Sop teebar, JS77. They claim (bat they were ?LtUlr-vi to 62} por cent, of the amount aa counsel fees. This nmountsto$17,646.90, to which add $325.60 disbursement*, ag ji-egate? $17,972.66, leaving ?10,202.00 to bo ace 'rated for to .the State. .This tmount, Mr. Corbin claims, has been ac counted for as follows : For legal service* in tho Savannah and Charleston Railroad cases in 1875 (in re. Daniel Hand) flOJ )56.60, leavingn balance of $206.06, whinb th*y say they paid into the State treasury. Che defendants also claim to have loaned Cardoso, the spurious 8tato trees} tirer, in December, 1877,!*18,770,? which iras used In-payingoffthe Mackey House [which elected Corbin to tho Senate,) foi iv h ich ho holds the pay certificates of CU oiembors of tho Mackey House and 1? ;nembtra of th? Mackey Senate The suit came up regularly for triol ir? tire court to-day. The State is represen ted by the attorney-general, Leroy I?\ Sfoumnns, Esq. and Mr. C. II. Miles, ol Charleston, and the defendant? by A'mn! T. Ackerman, of Georgia, and Wm. E Barle, of Greenville. Mr. Enrlo did not make his appearanci In court, and Mr. Corbin stated that hi iod received a telegram fror/, him statin} bat he failed to make connection ch th? railroad. He said his caso could hot g< c-n without the oresence ofl his coun iel. The attorney-general said the Stab tvould not take'any advantago of tho ab sence of the counsel, but toe State hoi two witnesses from Charleston (Messrs A. D. Cohen and Henry Buist) wno wer compelled by professional engagement to return to Charleston to-night, nm their testimony was regarde-j impoi Ant. After some consultation it was decide :o begin the case by reading tho pleading! ind the jury was organized after which notion was formally: mad? io strike tu From the answers an^ dismiss all th munter claims set up by tho defendants The argument on this motion, howcvei was postponed until tho arrival of Mi Barle. Mr. A. D. Cohen was then called s tho first witness for the State. Ho test Qed that be was the reference in the Oa Point Mines suit alluded to in the pleat inge. The case was heard by witness I Charleston ?nd he made a report as t be fees of the counsel. In determinin the amount of compensation, he took th testimony of Messrs. Buist, Magrath, 1 kv. Simons, and Simonton. Corb! & Stor* also appeared and csdo a stab nen! ?* their claim against tbeState, (? to 65 ?te: cent, of the amount recovere in the judgment.) The testimony of 1 Sf. Simons recommending 75 per cen ?Iso of il. Buist recommending the enu jercentago, of C. H. ?imontou le?on hending 60 per cent, and disbursement ira? read by too witness. The witness a io read hts own report recommeodh 12} per cent, and the dUbursennrata i the proper compensation. Tho on! udmont that was brought to the attentif >f the referee st that time was a decr< for 55,984. A very atrenuona objection rros ra?31 joro by the defendants' attorney, wi claimed that tho judgmout could not 1 explained or proven by paro! testim ny. Judge Hudson ruled that the witne could not state what amount he hod r*. srence to in awarding the percentage u leas ho knew as a substantiva fact wb imount had bean actually collected, the plaintiffs ?vsir?d to proveIbal in? tros a decrer before that fixing an amoot they must t?rove it by tho decree ilse Tho question was then asked : Wh imount had been collected st that tim Annwcr, $5,984. Witness knew tb vCCwtCSC .t Understood ^xv fill thn r. crenco, that was the amount to r-. bich .t percentage had reference. This was t (cne ral understanding at the referen? he lawyers who testified came at. a Corbin's suggestion and at witness', : jueat. In November, 1876, witness i ported that there was $32,016 due ? c?tate. Nc referenco was bsd to this considering Corbin Ai Stone's i perot Cross examined : Witness stated tl a? did not say whether or not Corbin ? tually told bim that $5,584 waa 4 amount collected. That was the und (landing upon which Corbin acted.' W Bess knew the amount that bad boon i judged, and Corbin knew that witn knew it. Mr. Henry Buist wa? next exam In He testified that ho had bted requca by Mr. Corbin to glvo bia opinion up the subject of compensation. , He t testified that 75 per cont, of thc arno! recovered was a fair compensation, i In givng bis opinion he had. reference a specific amount The question "w ?ros the amount/' was, on objection, ru t>ut and exceptions were not?d. . This ended tho case for tho State, i the Court took a recess until 6 P. M. The following lotter from Mr. A. Coben to Comptroller-General Dunn < proved and will be submitted in evide to-aiorrow. It is important, os show what percentage the referee intended allow Corbin & Stone os compens?t! . May? Tko*. C. Dunn,-E*q,, Comptroller-C trait I take the earliest occasion to repl; your communication of tue 24th. I ch ly understood the percentages sugget ?' ? i".1 '. vi<"\"u<: *<"' itL"Li.IM. miM ?) ; by the respective witnt&es to refer to the .um of $0,\>84,aud my TetwrtsSlowed tho mean, to the amount of 62? per cehr. Up* on catefblly-re^ngofer my report I see hoTr.it i? liable te tL?conaSructior, placed upon it by Meas re. Corbin & Stone. Ita ianguaao ia dot aa definite as it should have been. Tbair obosvoction is not mioe., I will aay; howryer, \hat I do cot think 62} per ceat. offfj/it?' would he ? euffleieot compensation fir the survieeo of Htissr.v Corbin & Stonb, down to the time of tho final decres io the coses. When roy report: was flied I thoughttb?t the compensation to be allowed on future collection was a matter for futuro adjust ment, i-'-. Respectlly, ABHEH D. Comsw. The consideration of the case waa re sumed st 0 p. ra. Mr. Aer~?rmr>n read a voluminous correspondence oetwoeft Cor bin et Jtoue and Dunn, ex-comptroller general, abd Melton; ex^ Attorney-Gener al Conner and tbs records of tho phon ??hate suit. At 7 o'clock the court ad ourucd uotil'lO n. m. to morrow, when the bearing of the cast will be resumed. --, MM >-...; A Dentist's Friend. An Oil City man was standing in frvht of a dentist's office, With an anxioa?. un happy look in bia eyes, and t^o yards of flannel round bia lower Jaw. He casi sorrowful glanr^a upward to the dentist's sign, aud iu a b.bitatiugsortof woy placed his foot on thr fowerstair ; then came out to tho otreet-ikain aa If ho had forgotten something.'' Col.. Solon came along at |bie messes Vahd: t:itb! a tho^ghtiui in terest lu the man's welfare, ?tia : > "Toothache, eh 7 Gola* to hate it pulled? Everbadatbbth pulled? Nol Well, you'd better go right up aforo your courn^'htlle you. Worst thing in the world k<<puUinTn Urptlu I've been, through the war. had both langs ebbt away, fifteen bullets tn roy j head,-, abd - doctors run, ? probe through roy shoulder right dowu through my body-to my too-thought 'twould kill me. Sut, man alive, I novo/ knew what pain was 'til I had a tooth pulled. Maybe, you think , tho tootbj ache i? horrible, . It is. It is awful. But wnit till tho dentmt rona them air iron tongs in your mouth, pulls the tooth right down through your jaw botte, aud then yanks away fte.u he was pulling at au old engine, an you'll think the toothache ain't no moro to bc compared to it than a flea-bito is toa rnilroadhccldcnt. Yen bad better go right up, thobgb, and have it out. Don't ?et anything ? said cause you to back out. . I merely wanted to pre pare yer mind (brit.,, And don't yer tait ether. Knew a man eppt about; yulti complexion nu' build, who took other, on ho died. It's dangerous. Jes' go righi up bu' have It out. I'll go up with yer and ace how yer stand it when he begin! twistin' the bones rouud. Yer won' s|eep a wink to night if yer don't hove ? out ; un'maybe yer won/t, nny how, foi sometimes tho tooth breaks tho jaw, in flomirritory. rheumatism strikes th) wbftt's-lts-nnrno nerve, am?, thc what-thoy call-it aota In." ; Jua* pt. tbis-mompnt a young mai practicing ou n French horn in one of th' apper roomsdrewalong, ear? piecing bleat like tho yell of a mun in torment, ant as the last sound echoed thrungli tho hall tho colonel oaid : that's lt ; there's ';orw oue gottlpga.tooth,pulled now, arid tb deutest hasn't aa moro thou just givei the first twist either. Come right uj and have yours yanked I Whoop! thor ho goes agin I" as another terrible blas from the horn carno-iown the stalrcast "Hold on, hold on l'^ yelled colouel-bu be . wasn't quick enough to stop tbe ma with the .achias; tooth, who rushed ou of tho doorway and down tho street e fast that his two yards of flannel becam unwound and streamed behind him Uk signals of danger-while the villainoi old colonel sat!down oe the lower ate end laughed till bia eyes ached. ^.?VHi POLL Tax.-Judge Hudson lu dttidbd, iu a case bravurbt beforo hin on appo-'t ^"r* *' ~ ?eoision of a Trli Justice, to Richland County, that tl law Inflicting imprisonment for not pai lng the poll tax is unconstitutional. Tl appeal was taken upon ibo grotind tbi the law waa unconstitutional, In that waa repugnant to Section-20, Art. I. < the Constitution, which provides th "Ko person shall bo imprisoned for doc except in case of fraud." Tho Judj aays: This tax is no*, a debt in tho oidinoi nor legal sense of the word. It is sot: matter of contract. It arisca neither i ?oonfrarrb nor ex delicio / neither by e press promise, by implied agrecmrnt;n by wrong inflicted. It J? ?imply, ?t d mond made bf citizens by tho State bring forward, each bis share, toward.tl maintenance abd support of gover ment ; which. demand tho cltiswn , h no ontlon nor choleo ia ; responding but,'if recreant, eau . be compelled obey by all the sovereign power of tl land. With no lets powercould a Sta Ure. _' j- ? ' ..; - Worrying will wear th? richest ll to shreds. - Hear.'bow a judge decides in Hu gary: Sometime ago ? man died ban ru pt; and though ne did not leave ? widow a tingle penny, ho bequeath ber a very large unpaid bill nt local pt lie house. His creditor did honor to I memory by bringing ari action ago!) his wiuow for the payment nf her bi band's drinking account. She prov that she was absolutely pennllfesa, I tho. judge condemned her to pay t bill with costs, on the ground that ber evidently capricious sud imprae?c hie temnor she had driven her into hi band to' the public house, . in,'order And there the comfort and peace whi were denied him ot home. - An old Pennsylvanian relatos t following .incident: When Winni Scott Hancock was a lad of thirteen, applied to the Speaker cf tho House Representatives of Pennsylvania appointment as pago to that body "What bj your name, my little follow said the Speaker. "WinSeldSeoxtH; cock," answered the stripling. *'Al exclaimed the Speaker, *Wd yon sign Declaration cf Independence?" M] air," said the boy,, with proud lodep dence "but if I had been there I abo have don ese." It is needless to say bo cti!??d tba appointment, and by hi* ?te; adhereaee to duty, and independe of character, !aid the foundation of futuro "career bf usefulness and hos The' Rev. Mr. Chainey, pastor bl Flwt Unitarian Church, Evansville, A becoming Infected with rational! views, recently startled bia congrega! by a declaration that he bsd Inst his fi in God ; that public prayer of hbo mockery; that the hymn-books of church would serve s better pMrpos sold for wanto paper, and that, ii" fie ? tinucd his ministry it must bo ou t basis of belief. Mr< Chainey wa member of Reed. Masonic Lodge, for somo yearn was ita ChoplaTn. - was arraigned before tba lodge, bia mba was placed in evidence, and ha expelled for "on-Masonic ' conduct' "ottering falsa t?tonghto, doubla opinions.''- The other Mason? indulged expressions of like, belief expecting; to be expelled, and ooo already bean turarcoued for trial. . ??? ??-1-rr~~-T- ". : . IV/?lcfti Note?. Tho Now York' Tribune, tho official Garfield organ, has .not mentioned the ?nme rf .Arthur editorially Since hi? nocdpatiim. *>?, -'- Senator Eaton, of Connecticut, faye that New York. New Jersey and Con necticut will go for Hancock "aa euro na tho aun Ahinca - Be; Yrtsofthe departure of nocroes from Kentucky to voto the-Republican ticket in Indiana continua to come in, The Indiana Dem?crata should ho watch ful, - "The war ia cot ended," aaya the Philadelphia SuKef" Then your party bas bern lying terriiny when it announces in its platform what It bas done "since th? war closed," How ir that? - The Philadelphia 7V<*8 (Rep.) sAye , that ex-Senntor Conover, a candidate for GoVerrior, ls a load on th? Republicans of Florida, afe?? that h? "should be elim inated frotn the,campaign," - Gen. Hancock is reported to boa rich man. Besides all his other proper ly In Missouri, he bas some excellent coal mines, which he refuses to soil and doe? not at present care to open. - Jewell pife? thc/screws by levying twp . per cent, on Federal emuloyea' salaries, with prompt discharge from Ber rico if the taxis, put paid. He gooa for 8r.hu rz's department iii ibo mme way. Sch?re lind hitherto protected hh clerk? from auch raids, but tho party "must bo s?fed" now. - Tho Boston J'osf aays : "Gen. Gar field is la one respect the most unfortu nate pf candidates.. Of all the serious charges brought againat him in'relation to his public life, not ons originated with the Democrat?. They were preferred by his own Congressional associ?tes, bis own constituent*, and his own party friends." - Gert. E. G. Marshall, a prominent . Republican of Pennsylvania, has hoisted tho Hancock flag. He eays: "I have known him.for a lifo time, having been with him ?s a young man in thc United States infantry, omi from his boyhood to the present time I have never known a ' man moro pure than Gen. Winfield Scott Hancock." - Tho Utica (N. Y.) Observer has lld? to say of the Republican stampede to the Democratic party; ''The great maea of the Republican party ero lukewarm or woree. Not a fow. aro openly, hostilo to ' Garfield. We shall print n.list of Utica Republican signatures to a Hancock roll in a few days which will pleasantly as tonish our Democratic reader?. What ta truo of this locality is true of thc whole North. Tho lido is everywhere setting strongly in our favor. It will not reach its full until election." - The Philadelphia Times, in com menting on Garfield'* letter of accep tance, cays: "As to the policy of a Garfield administration the country ia rpito ns much in tho dark ns ever. Tho letter is, therefore, a great disappoint ment. The passing tribute of a glance is alt that it can claim. There are in it no thought? that breathe, no words that burn, to bold tho attention or command conviction. It will not revive a droop ing campaign ; it will not mnke con vsrts ; it will not recall deserters; it will jba simply ?cad and forgotten." - Tho facts stated in this paragraph, from the Pittsburg Post, are rail of sig nificance:. "We eave not noticed the hanging around the corners the old set of ltcpubucahs who k'apt their pocket-books out, bantering democrats to bet on tho ?lection. They don't appear to have any heart or change to invest, in this cam paign, in which I? a fah* indication they have no confidence in the result.. We dp hear of some pretty sick chape .who - bet. in Ohio.on the election of Garfield, and have since boen in Pennsylvania, and finding the tide running one way, would like tn. hedge." - Tho Philadelphia Times closes an article on tho political battle that is to bo fought in that city this year ns follows : '''Everything points to a contest of unu sual desperation ia Philadelphia, and the largest poll by many thousands ever given in tho city. The Republicans bavo thice-fourtbs of the election boards and the machinery neceaba ry to resolve ?ll doubts in their favor ; but they will now be met with the most cotsfident, defiant aud disparate Democratic army they have encounted since 1800. It will bo Greek locking boroB with Greek, and tho Ropclicau supremacy in tho city will bo contested at every step by the Demeur?t to faith that looks fera Hancock triumph in the State." . - When Hayes announced to tho Senate that bo had dismissed Arthur from tho government service, ho said: "With my information cf fuels io th? case, and with a deep sense of tho re* sponsible obligation Imposed upon mo by the Constitution, to "take care that the laws be faithfully 'executed,*? I rc^ gardtd Ita? Pty plain duty to suspend the officer in; question encl to make the nomination now before tbs Senate, in order that this important office may bo houtatly and efficiently nAniiniste'red/* That is, the chloe had, under Arthur, beau dishonestly and iaefliciently admin istered, ?nd with this Republican testi mony of Artbar'a entire unfitness for any office, tho Republicen*pasty nominated Irita with abs uta of joy at Chicago. -? The Seaton (Pa.) Times, au Inde pendent journal, speaks ita mind ver/ plainly in ?.hb;bricf article : j^Tbe Tune? ls for So??Ovk, bovoiiBQ ho in nr.Ecock, sud hot because be Is s. Democrat. This paper hes favored no candida*? but Hancock, a^i.slnco he has boon nominated wo pro pose to show. a little independence by speaking a word for bim and through it* columns ; whether it bas effect or not ire win do our duly jual in? na rn p. And right here we wont to say that we believo one party is as bod as tho other--if not a greed deal worse-end when the Demo crats nut up a good mah, and when tho Republicans put np a bad wan-as see tho New York Times and Tribune, both Republican papers, of Feb. 19, 1873, concerning the Kelly Garfield Credit Mobilier affair--we aro for the Democrat, although wo never voted for ens- In our life, and you'll find all tho Independent voters and . et least twothivd? of tho greeobackcra will be for the dune man neat November-Gen. Winfield Scott Hancock, a mon who bas a bigger, no bler, and truer heart than all the wiry politicians in tb? Und." No GOOD PEEACHIHG.-No man pan, do a good job of work, preach *. good sermon, try a law suit well, doctor a pa tient, or write a good article when he feels miserable and dull, with sluggish brain and unsteady nerves, aad none should make the attempt in such a con dition when it can be so cosily and cheaply removed by a little Hop Bitters. See other co', jmn.-APmn?/ ???WA?. - The strongest heart will ft?nt eome tiraee Pudor tho feeling that enemies are bitter and that fricada only koow half tho sorrow. - A wood shed is a uecewary part of every economies! farmoiJa home, ft doe* not cwt much in construction, ie & great convenience iu keeping >A*5* wood dry. and fum?Ahcs a shelter Ulrich, much, ff not all, work of preparing tho wood ^or tho ntova can bo done lu stormy w^Mpf^ of winter and the rainy days of summer.