The Cadiz Democratic sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1854-1864, 1854-02-15

whether it could have been editorial but seeing it
copied extensively into different papers, thought
that it must be such We could not then nor we
can now, consider John Mitchell true patriot while
he advocates such doctrines As our friend says he
does, in the communication above.
Our friend takes exceptions 10 our views about
probing such men deep before We place ony eout-
dence in them. This We think is the best plun- We
have FEoHUD our friend On several occasions las he
IS one Of those who understands !he business Of
PRoBIvs) and we have always found him to be
OF our warmest friends; but he is an excitablc
man.. He has seenan article in our paper thar does
not NEE his views He replies to it. las every one
Of our subscribers have right to, so they give US
their proper name conGdeniallyl in his usual sar-
castle manner without any regard for feelings, let
his opponent be one of his best friends or not If his
communication was in reply to any person but our
humble self we should be very apt to scissor" it,
but as it is wholly dedicated to us give it all
entire, for we suppose onr friend hiaks that ed
i;or can stand more ABUSE than any one else.
Since we wrote the article in our paper Of Feb. l.
to which or friend takes such great exceptions, we
have read several articles from Mr. Mtchol's pen
latterly, and our former views Of the man il the
same, thnt"he is either great knave or else he is
very short sighted
SO far as foreigners are concerned, we intended
nothing disrespeetful to them in our former article
Il was only such men as come TO this country under
some AEIsrocRArIc title. For instance, men like
Bcdini, Mitchell Donehey and such characters We
said then TO probe such men deep before you place
any confidence in then and We say so still Thsir
actions show that they need ii, 'let the country be
saved or not''
Our friends poatical and other personal allusions
to us, mag , for what they are worth. Our object
is always 10 do right Ii we err it Is an errot ofthe
bead not OF the heart. we have always tried to in
culcate correct Democratic doctrines, and we be-
lieye we were not violating any doctrine of the
Democratic party when we published our article a.
bout John Mitchell being "a strong advocate for sla-
very "our friends opinion, to the contrary notwith-
standing.
Il is no pleasure TO us TO enter into discussion
with man like our correspondent He has peculiar
notions and views about some things, Of which it
would be impossible to convince hin that he is
wrong,
''Fol he would be of the same opinion still"
So far aE his democratic doctrines ara concerned,
we have always believed him 10 be about right but
in the present instance we think he errs. We trust
that he may ba convinced Of hia error; ami ii he
should coadescend to reply again to such hambe
person as oursof that he will try and not be 50 ex
ctablo and personal about nothing.
We will say in conclusion, that our friends com
municalion, gives Mitehel's paper, the Citizen, a
pretty good puff for winch will not charge either
him or Mr. Mitchell. Ii wo hal written such a
pufr' as our friend has we should have charged for
it, but being that it comes from friend Of Mr..
Mitchel's we will let it 90 fres.