Glasgow weekly times. (Glasgow, Mo.) 1848-1861, 1854-09-21
The Banner.

slotS between that paper ana the lines |
were conducted with becoming courtesy
and gentlemanly bearing. 1t has chosen to
abandon this mode of discussion, and deal in
personalities and black-guardism, made up
Of deliberate ISLANDERS and downright false
hoods. Let us note the history Of that con-
Germ and our discussions.
Some time last spring the Banner pro-
pounded certain interrogatories to the Times,
which were promptly and cOurteously an
swered; after which, the Times propounded
few interrogatories to the Banner. In an
swering those interrogatories, the Banner
complimented the Times for its promptness,
and thanked it for "ahording an opportunity
to define its position on the subject under
discussion-the Test question--which it did
at some length. A gentleman was then
acting as Mr.. Hancock's amanuensis, and
the views he then expressed for Mr.. Han
cock did not suit a portion of the democrat
ic party. A meeting was held soon after,
which resolved the Banner did not reflect
the views of the democratic party. The
Banner never published the proceedings of
that meeting--it pocketed the rebuff, turned
round, and eat its own words! During
the canvass, every sneak who had anything
against the wing candidates or the editor
Of the Times, sought its columns to vent
their spleen. Defeat overlook them, and
it. turned its guns upon its own members
by declaring the "gredt body Of the demcc-
racy Of old Howard, sound TO the core" 1t
having announced the "great body was
sound" &c., it was clear there was a
small body that was unsound. We insisted
upon an explanation; but seeing the awk-
ward predicamcnt il had placed itself in by
publishing an ill-timcd article while labor
ing under anger and modification conse-
quent upon defeat, it did not like 10 speak
ont. We insisted--accused il of evasion;
it come ont with "toerably satisfactory
answer" (Which we shall have use for
hereafter coupled with personal attach,
on the editor Of the Times-asscrting that
he had been accused of eaves-dropping, 10
his face-ofered no resentment-but left,
to save himself from being kicked.
We promptly denounced the charge as a
, "wholesaie lle--its iabricators great liars
e and dirty dogs" supposing the Banner
would either prove or retraot the charge.
IT DID NEITHER. In subsequent number
1t stated 1t had made the charge son good
authority" We again denounced it and its
"authority,' in the language quoted above,
to which 1t replies last week as follows:
me Glasgow !, il'nGs' or rather me MuIy Ram
II ments on our authority for what he chooses tc
{ term an ''sin"a''0n as to',oWs;
were wholesale Ies@t6er fobricoIors nrent liar.
and dirty dogs
me ppS, ",lui',In ;'ai We resc1'ea N rGSaiI
u for The amusement of Green, we will relate it -
fro l b Gay" os oco e and oi'g n Me were n
wing who was bitterly denouncing Green, for
have done He boiIv asserted that man "V whs
: would submit to such an indignity was no more
and u friend Green is mistaken if he s srnnoscs we
would accept assistance in conducting, q contro
h hook. wont bite, are afraid to strike, and cal
is only bleat''
y mat "s'anhch old Wing must be a "ma'
!. III onoNram' Ian imaginative creature
J. lie runner 'wo' TO cover up ne humoer one
r we so pronounce H'm' until ne assumes
= tangible shape
we nave never FORA moment entertained
the shadow Oh " suspicion 'ha' MIR. nan
cock wrote 'he editorials oil the banner
y ana as soon as we discovered " oepaF'ur
A. from a decofus course OF controversy w
n charged the authors OF inc editorials VIII
ID oeihg ,sheakS and guerrliias' shooting iron