Vermont telegraph. [volume] (Brandon [Vt.]) 1828-1843, 1837-02-08
Vol. IX....No. Co.,.

the Telegraph haS remaining parTcIs Of
moral courage, they are assured that the
privilege is granted them with all cheerful
ness. In return, may we not ask and sx-
pect Of them, "a exemplars Of moral courage
and Of what is "Christian, manly and civ
ilized," that they lay this our defence against
their charges, before their readers In
most doleful strains they have eked out as-
cusations against the Telegraph, as though
the latter were guilty of some heinous sin,
some objectionable offence against Chris
tianity, manliness and civilization. All tbs
Telegraph asks Of the editors Of the Chroui-
Gle is, that they let their readers be the
court and let the Telegraph be heard in self
defence. In their own words, Eve deny
their right as men," by not thus doing, "to
neglect making full and frank acknowl-
edgemen, of error in the case and we a.
sert that obedience to the dictates Of an en-
lightened conscience will infalllbly produce
such an acknowledgements, and that Chris
tan Editors are the last men in the world
who ought to be destitute Of moral courase
and the candor always TO obey those do
tates. To acknowledge an error, when
committed, promptly and in the full extent
of it, is among the first editorial duties; and
is the proper test Of editorial manliness and
moral courage" The editors of the Chron-
icle arc assured that although this language
is theirs, the sentiments are not more theirs
than ours. We shall see whether they will
abide by their own rules. The result will
show whether the candor and moral cour-
age are all on their side.
Our defence is this: eve deny" any
"regIect" on our part toward the Chronicle.
Our readers were promptly informed Of the
Chronicles assertion that the article headed
"Southern Convention" was by them cop
led from the Evangelist. We then stated
what was and is truth-that they had
" not denied that their object in publishing
the article was to strengthen prejudice
against abolition" They now deny, and
we promptly give their denial. II would
have been in time for them to have accused
rs OF neglect, after we had neglected to give
our readers any information due to them or
to the Chronicle, if we had done so. A.
for granting the editors Of the Chronicle ga
full acquit'al before our readers, "all we can
do consistently with our views Of truth and
justice is, to allow them to speak for them
selves through the Telegraph, and to oe-
qu1t themselves, If they can. Our act, In
The beginning, Of imputing the motive we
did TO the Chronicle for Publishing the
Southern article, was not committed Cen
, mere suspicion" A reason was then a.
legged which was deemed amply justi6a5le
The lmpu1atlon was founded, as our readers
may we'll recotect-or as they may at once
ascertain by turning back to page 50 of the
Telegraph, present volume-on the "pro-
+ sldreTy sentiments and uiolent spirit tov-
ards abolition, notorious Of that pqtnt"--
: AS they, however, being hard pressed, have
now thought proper to deny the entertain
ment Ct such motive, We most cheerfutIv
allow them to speak for themselves end
make the denial before our readers; and for
. ourselves, We heartily rejoice TO find that We
were mistaken. Not that we ejoce to have
been mistaken, but to find that the editors
OF the Chronicle were actuated by some 9TH
er motive than the one which seemed to 10
most fairly iDferable from all their conduct
on she subject. At the same time we mos,
gladly stand corrected, eve DENY their
/ r'gnt' to treat US as savages for going to a
conclusion 10 which their course for the last
f hive years drove US, willing or unwilIiuq-
we farther "deny their right" or reason.
TO claim that, previously to their present
aVo"al, the same motives should have been
imputed to them as to the New-York Evan
gellst, for publishing the article" Although
1t =" can by no means be allowed, to imputs
anything wrong to the intellectual or moral
vision OF the" Chronicle, we had, neverthe-
less, In the plenitude Of our moral and in
teIlectual obliquity, supposed it to be just,
fair and rational to impute different motives
TO different prints for publishing the same
article. To illustrate our understanding Of
the matter, we ask, who would impute the
same motives to the United States Tele-
graph or the Newly ork Courier aud Enoui-
rer, as 10 the Emancipator or Liberator, for
publishing without note or comment the ar
ticle now under consideration? mo COM
parlson, good friends of the Chronicie-only
an illustration j Our view of the case then
Is this by how much the Chronicle main
talns the same general doctrines and mani
tests kindred spirit with the EvangeIis, or
any other manor IN O ,;o- oL;.. L ~