The Davenport gazette. [volume] (Davenport, Scott Co., Iowa) 1841-185?, 1851-09-11

elf the publication alluded to was print
cd with our materials, it was done wilhou
pur knowledge or consent, aud we perform
ed all that could be asked or expected Of Us
in The case, by any reasonable person
having dismissed from our employ the in
disidual supposed to have been guilty; bu
as 10 lis being issued By US, or our havin!
any cagnition Of its intended publication
we nail the declaration 10 the wall as Ut
lerly wiihou, foundation. Banner.
There, had our neighbor stopped at lha
his course would have been commemorate
but in having allowed his "angry passions
to fise," he has betrayed himself into The
use Of language that is neither correct no.
courteous. II one line from the Gazette
can throw The Banner into such stew, how
many lines would il take 10 roast him alive
That's problem for our young friends.
Bu, as we have no disposition 10 increase
the premcnitory Cholera symptoms of our
ncighbor, we will give few words Of ex-
PLANTATION and dismiss the subject.
II appears that sour fault hath this ex
tcnt," and no more; We said, there was 81
little dirty sheet issued the prescn, weel
BY cur neighbor Of The Banner" Exactly
Now mark il we had net good grounds fol
such conclusion. 4 few weeks since /;
similar sheet, even more abusive Of res
pectab!e citizen, was issued from the Baa
aer Office and circulated not only over ihl
city but throughout the country. Mr.. e.
ga! Of course knew that this publication
Iemanaied from his Office. Bur did he sas
anything in respect toit! Not word, OF
The contrary continued to employ the maj
.ho wrote and printed il ID his Office ca
man 10 prin. by s,enlih--if such ,l4in.
sere possib!c--a publication OF that kline
IN our Office, would be visited by as severe
penalty as the lays provides 10 such case
unless he msde atouement. We neyei
would give him The opportunity o. repea,
inyii.) When The Gazette denounced III
a,ticle, and its nuthor as q scamp, aha, dil
tie Banner say? Not word. By s;leac
he sphell Rim.
Now a yile, little sheet comes forth issu
ed from The same office. What office? TIL.
9l.isc q eur nsighbor Of The Banner. Ane
shat is ihs consequence? The Gazette
gain denouDces it--as il does all nuisan
ces-and adds, il was issued By our neigh
Dor of The Banner. Aud in virtue SO i
sas, it came from bis Office. Does il foIlov
because lie knew not Of it being printet
here, he is 10 have mono of The response
bility Of lis issue? The pamphlet to which
he aliudcs 10 extenua.ion, uas publishes
by ''his neigh5or Of the Gazette" n,
says true, when be affirms it. And vel w
I'D cot print it, wo did not read the proc
sheets q il, we did not make The conirac
to publish il. Yet it was published BY us
because published a, our Office.
We arc responsible for every thing issu
ed anonymously al this Office, aud we holl
he publisher Of The Banner responsible lol
every thing issued thus from his Office
Had we been the injured individual in thi,
case we would not have stopped TO lerre
out the publisher Of the pernicious sheet
we should have held Mr.. Eegal responsible
Tor It, Just so soon as convinced il was tbs
oaspring Of bis office, until he produced he
author. Ian article appear in paper, Oh
is printed ia handful, over the writers
name, he is responsible for il. IF it be
anonymous, the publisher Of tie piece, III
he one case aud the proprietor OF he Of
tiee 10 the other, is responsible.
As we coDscieniiously believe the above
reasoning AID have ''made good tho ex
ceptionab'e remark, our neighbor can cast
y perceive the spirit that dictated it, and
we trust, as . gentleman, vii. apologize for
having niisconslrued our motives. Bu,
whether he does, or does moi. he can resi-
assured that however degrading tie exple.
Hves be uses, he never can induce Us thus
% paadcr 10 minds yiliated.
Mr.. BnSTrrr, q i1sca,iaa, il rebuild
nH '9is extensive m!l, 50 IstaIq dcsfroyea