THOMPSON’S TAFFY.AiheA Somewhat Caustic and Indignant Citizen Who is Opposed to Flapdoodle and m Favor of Calling Things by Their for j K-ight Nami19,To the Editor of the Patriot:The maudlin sentiment expendedtston-a’LOoyer the “late” W. H. Thompson and his return to account for his embezze-ment, strikes a common man as being entirely out of place.If some poor fellow had stolen a few bams from a smoke house, he would now be resting in the county jail and his condemnation would be a foregone con* elusion. But when an aspiring attorney deliberately takes from the bank a large sum of money, placed in his hands fora specific purpose, and goes to a distant city searching for an opportunity to [ risk and lose it in some gambling hell, ry i bis crime is tenderly spoken of as ai.«a-usis.*a-s-alborict,is“painful affair”—“the debt which had exiled him from his family,'1 etc.!And when the embezzler is apprehended and returned to the town whence he had tied to escape the penalty of his crime, so anxious are our “officers of justice” to not hurt the feelings of the “poor homeless wau-dereryihal they guard him at a distance allowing him a freedom not accorded common criminals. Bond is not giyen upon the day of his arrival, hut the jail coil knows him hot. Had he been poorstn»Q•eisteitise*rrei.and friend less his treatment would have been different!*s ! In the meantime the Indianapolis p i-r, peis are telegraphed that Mr. Thomp-,i mjii lias returned to Lebanon and the j “debts'1 he had failed to pay are being settled by his relatives! A stranger would receive the impression that Mr. T. was about to grace the bar of Lebanon once more with his person and practice.Several articles have appeared in local papers which evidently have their oiigin in a desire to prepare tin; public for Thompson's acquit tal. We are told that he “has hosts of friends,” that “there have been few men connected with the bar to whom the future denied more full of promise,” and that “intellectually he is fully the equal of his brother Maurice,11 etc.What does all this prove? Simply that if all these fulsome eulogies I e true, the guilt of die tr urinal is only the greater. His crime was a deliberate one and only differed from ordinary theft in that it combined betrayal of trust will) ronbery.He robbed his clients, disgiaced the bar of which he claimed to he a leading member, and Med the country to escape the penalty of the law.No sane person can doubt his guilt. As an agent he betrayed and robbed his principals.Any attempt to palliate and excuse his crime or to delay his prosecution and the proceedings to disbar him, will t j be justly condoned by public opinion as a dangerous encouragement to similar unprincipled persons to take advantage of their opportunities to rob the public.The records of the courts would show that it is not the first time that Mr. Thompson has been “under a cloud,” and no maudlin accounts of ‘ the beautiful sympathy” existing in his family, of his letters “mehinga heart of stone,” nor exaggerated assertions of his “oiil-liant ability,” will excuse his guilt or condone for any failure to biing him to justice and protect society against the danger of a repetition of his crime.i i:x.i31LfT'V»r* fVTill£»v_TlinIrina Ruif,.VatItheraaipremedayreningandhavhimHuewitlingsurjdid;seeig»Vlt;lastmetrentdie)oppfrreto tagamadietioislioneespewo;seeoatamIearwitcarbusnicAfglt;lt;tiltsioasmiis i is i tint hihe.poi a nehno:orabnorolt;polt;tinwlfeitocasitartebest;hiinreedasfn