The Portland gazette. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1818-1824, 1818-05-26

ltors stood sponsors, deprived OF their a,,.
parents, and sent as kind ofadyentu,s,.
this country.
The pililu plea that the Argus IS b.
means accountable, because these articles ~.
extracted from another source, cannot raso.
lis editors from the disgrace they have inc,s
red by publishing them, or exonerate tbs,
from the imputation Of the sentiments we ca,
sidered them as maintaining. When our A.
mocratick prints were formerly filed with n.
most copious extracts from The writings ftbes
then admired, but now neglected Cobbe
and the British opposition prints, the septi.
ments and principles they contained, we,e
avowedly those of the editors Of the papers !,
which they were inserted. We should No,
suppose the latter would have put on these par.
ments if they did not perfectly fit their backs
We certainly had righ 10 form similar con.
clusion in the case now before us. For it il
not 10 be presumed that any thing would ap.
pear in the pages of the Argus IFS editors dis.
approved, We therefore, did not conceive
the notice of the source from which the art.
tlcles upon which we animadverted, were de-
rived, OF any Importance. If we should in
sert IN our Gazette an article of any kind.
whether morale political, we should expect
that the principles it contained, would be con.
sldered as our own, and that we might with
equal justice and propriety be called to ac-
count for them, and that we were bound eli
Their 10 vindicae them, or express our re-
greet for having published them, as well as the
editors of the paper in which they made their
first appearance. In cases of libels, the copi-
er, is considered equally culpable with the
original publisher. 1t is true that editors IRE
qdently make extracts from other papers, in
order TO show their detestation of the princi.
pies contained in them. But then these ex-
tracts are generally followed by some COM
ments upon them for that purpose. But in
this affair the case was otherwise. They
were not followed by any declarations of that
nature. But ifthe intention of the editors
were of the kind we have just noticed we
heartily congratulate them on their change Of
sentiment, sincerely hoping they will eventu-
ally experience an entire political renovation,
and become entirely purged from the old leav-
en- of democracy. But five have mistaken
their intentions, we cannot but consider them
As having basely deserted their political breth-
rem, who, like Falstaf, may call out to them
with perfect justice, seal you this backing
of your friends ?" We would recommend to
the editors of the Argus, not TO publish in fl-
lure, any article, from other papers, of whose
insertions they may be afterwards ashamed,
whose sentiments they are unwilling 10 adopt
and whose vindication they would decline IN
dertaking as their own.
It is surprizing that the Argus has not offer
ed to.contradict the positions which were as
Sumed IN our paper, that no real republican,
no true American, no honest man, no genuine
could consistently undertake
defence ST the character and conduct of the
Napoleon.
We expected reply Of some kind or other
we anticipated the tenor Of tive are not.
therefore, disappointed at the style or the
temper it displays. We did not expect the
strain OF it would SAVIOUR of either modes ty OF
decency. These exoticks find neither ge-
NAL sun, nor a suitable soil in the garden of
the Argus. Iftransplanted thither, they would
soon become choked and destroyed by the
weeds and rubbish which would shortly gath
er around them. Grapes are never found up.
on thistles, and il is rare occurrence that
pearls are ever discovered on dunghill.
j 4 late Argus contained pretty severe satire
on the character of the town of Dedham in
in reply to an article publish
ed 10 a paper printed there relative 70 the Dis
trict Of Maine. Ii is sufficient TO observe, that,
in thi: town, so celebrated FOX crimes and ex-
ecutions, democracy has triumphed at every