ruin through possible libel suits.”
“Very good, sir. Having placed yourself beyond the pale of the law, may
God help your soul if you DON’T make precisely such a retraction as I
have demanded. I’ve got you now, and by–before you can get out of this
room you’ve got to both write and sign precisely the retraction I have
demanded, and before you go, anyhow–you—low-lived–lying—, I’ll
teach you what personal responsibility is outside of the law; and, by–,
Sheriff Cummings and all the friends you’ve got in the world besides,
can’t save you, you—, etc.! No, sir. I’m alone now, and I’m prepared
to be shot down just here and now rather than be villified by you as I
have been, and suffer you to escape me after publishing those charges,
not only here where I am known and universally respected, but where I am
not personally known and may be injured.”
I confess this speech, with its terrible and but too plainly implied
threat of killing me if I did not sign the paper he demanded, terrified
me, especially as I saw he was working himself up to the highest possible
pitch of passion, and instinct told me that any reply other than one of
seeming concession to his demands would only be fuel to a raging fire,
so I replied:
“Well, if I’ve got to sign–,” and then I paused some time. Resuming,
I said, “But, Mr. Winters, you are greatly excited. Besides, I see you
are laboring under a total misapprehension. It is your duty not to
inflame but to calm yourself. I am prepared to show you, if you will
only point out the article that you allude to, that you regard as
‘charges’ what no calm and logical mind has any right to regard as such.
Show me the charges, and I will try, at all events; and if it becomes
plain that no charges have been preferred, then plainly there can be
nothing to retract, and no one could rightly urge you to demand a
retraction. You should beware of making so serious a mistake, for
however honest a man may be, every one is liable to misapprehend.
Besides you assume that I am the author of some certain article which you
have not pointed out. It is hasty to do so.”
He then pointed to some numbered paragraphs in a TRIBUNE article, headed
“What’s the Matter with Yellow Jacket?” saying ” That’s what I refer to.”
To gain time for general reflection and resolution, I took up the paper
and looked it over for awhile, he remaining silent, and as I hoped,
cooling. I then resumed saying, “As I supposed. I do not admit having
written that article, nor have you any right to assume so important a
point, and then base important action upon your assumption. You might
deeply regret it afterwards. In my published Address to the People, I
notified the world that no information as to the authorship of any
article would be given without the consent of the writer. I therefore
cannot honorably tell you who wrote that article, nor can you exact it.”
“If you are not the author, then I do demand to know who is?”
“I must decline to say.”
“Then, by–, I brand you as its author, and shall treat you accordingly.”
“Passing that point, the most important misapprehension which I notice
is, that you regard them as ‘charges’ at all, when their context, both at
their beginning and end, show they are not. These words introduce them:
‘Such an investigation [just before indicated], we think MIGHT result in
showing some of the following points.’ Then follow eleven specifications,
and the succeeding paragraph shows that the suggested investigation
‘might EXONERATE those who are generally believed guilty.’ You see,
therefore, the context proves they are not preferred as charges, and this
you seem to have overlooked.”
While making those comments, Mr. Winters frequently interrupted me in
such a way as to convince me that he was resolved not to consider
candidly the thoughts contained in my words. He insisted upon it that
they were charges, and “By–,” he would make me take them back as
charges, and he referred the question to Philip Lynch, to whom I then