Fayetteville observer. [volume] (Fayetteville, Tenn.) 1850-1966, 1851-08-05
I. We will merely

HOtlCe Wldt Ue Sdyo dDOuG TIC di
mighty dollar" as another proof that
it must have been to crafty some
other than political cause that in
duced him to assail us. That has
great deal to do with political con-
troyersyl4 Our acquaintances will be
the best judges as to which of US, is
the greatest wor shipper of the god
nammon; and to them we refer it. 1t
is a mere ebullition of spleen at the
substantial success IS our principles have
met with.
He reiterates the stale charge,
twice dis proved, that We have called
him W ing. We again promo unce
it unforlnded. He only makes it
this time to justify him for assailing
our principles, and charging that we
were for White in SO, and that we
were forced to be a Democrat. He
says he will deba US from pleading
ntmay. We have not plead age
nor infrmity, neither will We. plead
Imfaly. We were for Judge White
in $50, and we are proud Of it yet.
Like hundreds Of Democrats in this
county, and all over the State, we
were for him as better Democrat
than Taa Buren,. He was a better
Democrat in SO tina q Vna Buren,,
and never strayed any furth her from
the true faith than Fan Buren, is now.
Judge White was an acknowledged
Democrat in SO, but afterwards be-
came in a great degree Wing, and
then we gave him up; and if yog~Wlll
look to our article of @measurEs not
men, !" you will find the reasons.
Our conduct has been practical il
lust ration Of that doctrine. We
fore bd to be de moerat! Tstead Of
proving that, yop~lhavv prov ed that
we would not gre urrr-our principles
for 4 personal consideration. 1t is
Ia ST fange sort of logic that Fan BIZ
ran getting a majority of the votes
of Lincoln should make US a Dem
CORA t, when we W ere, as the Editor of
the journal acknowledges, a Demo-
crat before. He seems only to be
mad because we did not follow Judge
White into the arms of whiggery.
He says that wh4n, the paper changed
We changed. WE say we we're not
required to change, fol- we we're moth
ing but an apprentice setting type.
The whole of this charge is as ap-
plicable to hundreds Of other Dem
ocrats in this county as ourself, and
we may therefore afford to pass on
ROW, merely remarking that " E, sub
nit this charge as another evidence
of the desperate N to which that ed
itor's folly has led him. He had as
well arraign US for having admired
Tom Benton. Have his passions
caused him to lose his wits? We
pause for reply We come now to
what that editor doubtless considered
the "knock down" argument of his
whole article. It is the charge that
although we call him so many hard
names we asked him to merge both
papers into one, and he become sole
editor. We are at a loss to deter
mine which gives evidence Of the
greatest folly; publishing such a
charge, or furnishing such a proof at
the same time to reflte it.
He says, I'VE were approached by
a gentleman on this subject last
spring. Here we might rest the
case, for there is the charge, and all
the proof we want Last spring
before this controversy commenced
d friend came to US, and addressed US
on this subject, and We told him he
might see the Journal man and learn
what could be done. 1t was at the So
licitation of friend, who advised it as
best for the party, and we only con-
sented with the understanding that
We would have nothing to do with
writing for the paper, as we knee we
could not agree with the Journal.
n