Bloomington herald. [volume] (Bloomington, I. T. [Iowa]) 1840-1849, 1841-09-10

In noticing the first number of the Iowa City
Argus, as, on all similar OCCASIONS we laid by all
partalitics and preudices and endeavored to speak
of it just according to what considered its merits
TO be. In so doing VIC were aware that we were
not acting upon the principle which governs too ma
ny presses Of the present day. putting those who pro-
TESS to uphold the principles they conending for,
and decrying those of the opposite party, be their
merits VIVA. they may. We spoke of the general
tone of that paper being too abusive OF our oppo-
nents to have beneficial influence with them, be-
lieving that was calculated to increase their preu-
dces against our party, if not to seal up their eyes
and shut their ears to the political sins of those who
act conspicuous part in the ranks of the friends OF
the administration. Passing by this part OF our ar
tice in silence, the editor charged us with uncourte-
Gus treatment because instead of complimcnting the
mechanical execution of the paper, we waived II I'M
til it should merit it. From that time until the APP
pcarance of tn the 4th number Of that paper almost
every friend who visited that place bought back TO
us the news that we had siuned in the sight of the
editor Of the Argus, for which we were in great dam
ger oil being Caieu 10 ItchoihiS. AZ tlo i'iteiiii
we published the card of Mr.. Lowe, denying the ut
terance of sentiments attributed to him BY the editor
of the Argus, together with the testimony OF Mr..
Deshlcr corroborating the statements Of MIR. H., SO
FAR as his knowledge of the conversation between the
two extended The language used by Mr.. l.. was
in nowise offensive, save that it raised question OF
yeracity between himself and the editor Of the Ar
u,s. and made statement of sentiments expressed
nv the editor from which motive might be inferred
for the construction, or Interpretation, he put upon
the conversation held with Mr. L.. The statement
of Mr.. d., appended to the card of Mr. L., was brief
containing not supertluous syllable in sustaining
Mr.. L. on the point of veracty. To this card the
editor of the Argus made lengthy reply, couched
in harsh and offensive language, spiced with various
epthets, applying them not only 10 MIR. L., but TO
Mr.. D., who had done the least he could in the mat;
ter, il his memory of the conversation was, he
states, correctly given. This reply request
ed to publish. To refuse TO lay ourselves liable
to the charge of inuring an individual and then co-
sing our columns against reply; and to publish it
without comment would have led our readers to be-
lieyc that we exercise no control our columns,
and that they were liable to be polluted by any kind
of an article at the request of protested political
friend. Under these circumstances, we thought il
best to give place to the reply at the same time ex-
pressing regret at the necessity which compelled
us to give place to so much bllingsgate.
Ia te Argus Of the 2st ut the editor thus speaks
Of the matter:
"BlooMINGvoN HERALD.--The Editors of this
paper ace regrt 10 see have again introduced them
selves to the Public as having some untiendly feel
ing towards this paper We regret to think, that
the public must see in the publication of the attdch
and defl;ce, between Me. Loaee and oWseif ,oa,,-
ton interference on their part, in behalf Of the
sailants Lure q, Deshler. The card of Lowe and
certificate of Deslier inserted without
from theun-cards which had for i.er object an In
tenton to fastcn upon us the charge of ialsehood-
not so with our reply, reply which we know no
man acquainted with language and good sense, can
say, carried with it gross ara dGnaning IN ansuH
as did the case of Mr. Lowe, to which was append
a the ao1coanpttss1eastuS certificate Of Deshler.-
Yet our reply in the sight.of these Editors very
insulting, and il was with great reluctance they gave
it an insertion. We leave the gentlemen, however
to settle the matter with the Democrats of Muscatine
as best they can. For our part can inform them
We have objects of more importance in view, than
bandying epithets with Editors replying to every
trivial matter that may be thrown out by interested
or des;gning men, AID hereafter we shall pass all
such sltS'bs.'
Now we are willing to submit the question to any
one acquainted with the rules which govern the fra
iernity, whether is not ustiiable in
ry particular. We had published the statement of
Dr. jackson, charging Mr.. Lowe with the utterance
of sentiments calculated to injure him in the estima-
ton of his fellow citizens, when candidate before
them for responsible station, and were, therefore,
in duty bound TO afford him an opportunity of deny
ing or dsploving. In replying Mr.. l.. used Ian
guage except in relation to the point at issue, and
therefore it unnecessary for US to accompany it
with word of comment. Not so with the rejoin-
der of the editor of the Argus. He may assert that
| no of sense sag it was couehcd in offensive
language, but it is only the opinion of man whose
rascbility of temper leads him TO extremes against
that Of all whom we have heard speak on the sub
jet. His rcjoindcr was of that character which he
stated to Mr.. Lowe, should never appear in the COL
umns Of paper which he exercised the right
Of control, but much more odious, so much 80 that
if we have erred in the premises, it was in giving
place to it at all.
So far regards settlement OF the matter with
the Democrats Of Muscatine, the editor is right in
leaving that matter to alone not botherng his adj
died brain with it. We have yet TO learn that the
Democrats of this county have taken the editor Of
the Argus under their charge, resolving that whose
ofiendeth him sinneth against the faith o. the Dem
cratic party. Until some one of them shall charge
rs with Injustice shall neither halt to cxa,,airac