The Daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1845-1850, 1847-01-12
Tte Datlp spy.
THE LANCASTER CONTROVERSY.
ORCEST Err:
TUESDAY, JfJVO.ARY IL. ls47.


the kind where our only desire is, that truth and the
right may prevail. With the parties both sides,
far as we are acquainted with ihem our relations have
been of friendly character, and should regret any
occasion for them to be otherwise Yet that feeling is
not so strong induce permit any improper m-
putaions, either upon motives, to go
unrebuIe ed especially when volunteered by those who
have no personal interest in the matter.
We have been led to these remarks, by having our
attention called 10 certain articles in the Boston Emanci-
paor the Worcester Co. Gazette and the Boston Atlas.
We shall confne remarks, TO the first and the
last Of these The remarks of the Gazette will be the
subject of separate article.
The Enancipaor and the Gazette are so much in the
habit of disappearing u.s. that look for nothing bet
from hem whenever they have occasion to speak of
US. Usually we do no, think il worth our while TO
,ice them for we do feel that standing in the
community depends, very much either upon the good
the evil that they may speak ofus But when The rights
of Others may besafected duty is imposed upon US
: which we may not disregard
1t seems that copy of.he private correspondence be
tween and j. G. Carter has been placed in the hands
of the editor of the Emancipation, without eave--a
thing OF which we should not particularly complain
whatever rights in the case may he-but for the mis-
representation which is made of IAN act far dis
honorable than would have been the publication OF the
correspondence ITSELF
We pass over the talk of the Emancipator, about
falsehOods, forgces and pe5ures, "caIumnes &c.
they are words easily spoken, and wha are common
with that paper that their reteration has ceased pro-
duce any very astonishing effect upon the community
and come at once to the following passage in the edi,o
rial ofthat paper.
1t will also be seen that the editor of the Spy after
a little pefogng and vexatous delay, has given up
Mr.. Carter, the Of those respectable individuals
whose influence was grea; with him, that they could
persuade him 10 publish known fasehood too late
be contrddcted before he electon-or Mr. Earle knew
at the time he made the publication that Mr.. Garter is
and has ever been OF uaspoued integrity, AMI
esteemed by his neighbors who know him best.
We have before US copy of the correspondence be-
tween Mr.. Carter and Mr. Earle, resulting in the dis
closure OF the of Messrs. John g. Ihu,Son ia
cob Fisher, Anthony Lane: Caleb T. Symmes and Henry
Lincoln, as the authors Of the caumny Mr. Earle per-
sISling in the refusal to INFORM his readers of Mr. Car
ters peremptory denial Of erery material flct'
charged IN the attack
AS TO the 9 vexaous delay" here complained Of, we
may state that have replied insontiy every letter
we have received on This subject and the only delay
there in giving up the names, was, till could get
she written permission Of the authors of the article
iCopoiioirtC
all the legal consequences Of the publication, not
10 be supposed that should take such step without
consulting them We wrote 10 them the
asked for, and communicated them as soon as their
reply was received AS 10 the charge, that Mr. Earle
persisted in the refusal 10 inform his readers Of Mr. Car
sers denial Of every material fact charged IN the at
sack"-t is utterly false Our columns ere open, from
6rst 10 last, to any denial explanation be might
choose 10 make and such denial as above spoken
Of .cas made ill his letter of Dec. 81. That letter
handed TO us, after cande.lishtng on Friday evening,
Jan. l. when paper for Saturday was already made
up We instantly informed HIM Of the circumstances
and also tina, ,oould be published daily Of Mon
day. and we think, we added in the weekly also,
but of This not certain, copy of the elie
retained The publication, however, was made
both those papers. Thus instead Of psrsSting in III
refusal" to inform readers OF the denial
fused al aH nor had we any disposition to refuse it, So
much for the veraey Of Joshua Leavt.
But the EmancIpator speaks of publishing ga
knopn fasehood," and adds, +" for Mr. Earle knew at
abe time he made the publication, that Mr. Carter is, and
has ever been of unspoiled integrity and so es-
teemed by his neighbors, VINO know him best" we
ahink the editor had considered little more and writ
written this passage ALL "A known ialsehood" for
soolh Aud how known How stands the matter p
We have the declaration Of FIVE respectable men as
there are in Lancaster, that il is true. On the other
hand, the charge is of the gravest character and is
made with full understanding Of the liabilities which
Imposed those who made it; the liability if untrue 10
heavy damages in cvii suit and fine and imprsn n
ment in criminal one. Yet, in liew of these liabilities
they made the charge and persist in il. We have the
denial Of its truth by James c. Carter alone and had moi
even that, when the publication was made. We need
moi say, under such circumstances, what the IRE sump
fOns necessarily we're but hat we could not know the
article to be false must he evident 10 all As 10 the
reason, given bJ the Emancipation, why il should ne. 10
us known ialsehood'-that the Editor of this manor
knew al the time he made the publication that Mr..
Garter is and has been man Of unspotted inepr
~ and so esteemed By his neighbors, who know him
best"-we may briefly say, that the assumption is en-
trely graiuous. We knew Thai charges such as those
now uader discussion, had been freely made for long
time, against him, and in the respectable circles =
We knew that the Who authorized The present charg
es were his neighbors" who had been some Of them
al least associated wi him in the most intimate con
neon and had had the chance, least 10 "know him
besD Still, we had not undertaken TO Judge him, nor
a. we now way is now, fairly open TO him for the
fill aud eomnIeie vndicatO Of his character and Il we