Minnesota weekly times. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1854-1859, 1854-11-21

on the church stseples to see how blows the wind.
They are On all sides of all questions when
ever public opinion compels them to shift their
sails. Their time is continually occupied in
watching tho breeses. They play s'second- fd-
die" to some body else. They feel gradually be-
fore they venture to if the ice will bear them.
They consult this one or that one, and notwith-
standing their convictions Of Fight tell them to go
ahead, still they falter because they are generally
owned body and soul-because they are mot
their own masters. Such individuals are inva-
raiably getting into hot water. They cannot
please all, but they desire to, and in the attempt,
they often times make themselves ridiculous, and
exhibit an inconsistency which is really amusing.
Among this class we can safely place our amiable
friend of the Minnesotian. He is a most vigilant
watcher. Nothing escapes his eagle eye! If it
is polite (no matter whether it is rightly to jump
this side of the fence to day, whop, he goes,
head and heels, and if it is polite to jump back
to morrow, back he comes, and as soon as he set
ties on terra firma he swears that he never Jump
ed over the fence,-that he has always been on
one side. Now such men are hard to get along
with, but while they suppose they are deceiving
the public, the public are laughing over their
weakness. Let us illustrate. i..r
The Minnesotian, i'll its issue of Friday, the eth,
devotes over q column to us because we asked
the editor how long since he became convinced
of the enorrnitv of the Nebraska Fraud. This
question was asked in all honesty, and we can't
see why it should not have been answered in a
gentlemanly way, without stigmatizing us as ssthe
Green Eyed Monster," &c. No matter YOU may
| oa1 hot xIo
not affect us in the least. But let us examine
your denial of the charge preferred. You say:
The assertion that the Mnnesotan ever thought
| 1T best not to allude to the Nebraska fraud, for
Fear of making an enemy to the Territory of Mr..
Douglas, is one of the same species Of vagaries,
Or 'eccentricities,' which the Times has been
wont to indulge in towards us all the while. 1t
has no foundation in truth whatever.
Last winter, when the Nebraska Bill was pend
ing in the Senate, we MT Mr.. c. d. Fillmore (now
deceased) at the Post Office, and while conversng
with that gentleman the editor Of the Minneso-
tian Joined US. In the course Of the CONVERSE
ton we remarked that if we had control of a pa
per we would speak out boldly on the Nebraska
subjective would not permit such villanous
act to pass by unnoticed-that it was matter in
which the people were interested, and it was
source Of surprise to that the papers in the ter
ritory did not take it up. We were replied to by
the editor of the Mnnesotan: s'That our territory
had nothing to do with it-that our Delegate had
no vote-that Stephen A. Douglas was a great
friend of Minnesota-that by opposing the meas
ure should INCUR his will-that other gen.
tlemen who favorable to the scheme were
also friends, and for one he would not gas
about it, &C." This he told not only us but 9th
ers, and yet he says that Our ''assertion has no
foundat on in truth whatevcr'' In the article quo
ted, it VIII be observed that the Mnnesotan is
spoken Of We referred the edit or of that paper.
and not the paper ITSELF Very well. The conversa-
ton to which we refer, took place we think after
the appearance OF the articles in the Mnnesotian
of Feb 18th and 18th. Now let us inquire why
the editor jumped over the other side of the fence
so unceremoniously? Simply because a railroad
charter had been imported from New York City
and if that charter passed the Legislature, Mr..
Douglas, with others whose names we need not
mention, to be interested in the Railroad
and were to use their efforts to get grant of
land for the same. 1t was necessary therefore,
for the success of this charter and this Railroad,
that those who hitherto had spoken out on the Ne
did remain mum until after the repeal of the
Minnesota Land Bill Fraud, until they had got
all they could out of Mr.. Douglas and his friends,
until the opposition to the Nebraska iniquity be-
came popular, and then, 1ikc the Minnesotian,
they turn round, and with brazen-faccl impu-
dence, assert that they have olpa,s been on the
right side. An inveterate enemy of the Nebras-
ka fraud, gentleman who acknowledged that it
was wrong, requested US not to write any art-
Giles on Mr. Douglas, and his iniquty, because
Mr.. Douglas ,ros interested IN the railroad mat
ter, and this is the same individual who during
the sammer blew the bugle for the Minncsotian.
With the exception Of the two articles which the
NIinnesotian quotes, that paper scarcely noticed
the Nebraska issue, until within few months
past, and now it seeks to make its readers believe
that it has always been an ardent friend of the
cause. The editor talk of ''eccentricities eva
garies," &c. He has exhibited lack Of princi-
pile, which is much more censurable than the pc
culiarties he attributes to us.
The editor speaks Of article in the Times
previous to the election which he says Il friend
pronounced false. &c. All we have to say is,
produce your article, and yonr friend deny the
them. 1t is somewhat singular that the editor
himself has never denied them. lie also alludes
to a s'professei' friends Of ours. Very we'll we
presume he ,oas friend. Ii he is or is not, it is
matter of little consequence. 1t is irrelevant to
| the case.
The Minncsotian we'll knows that the first arti-
Gle in the Pioneer denouncing the Nebraska bill,
was written by the presnt editor of the Times
He also we'll knows that another article which
appeared in the Pioneer, taking different grounds,
was written by Hon. Joseph Il. Brown, the editor,
and yet the Mnnesotan would be glad to make it
appear though we were responsible for both
articles.
We are not jealous of the Minncsotian. There
is nothing for us to be jealous over. 1t is the Min
nesotian which is jealous of us; here has been the
difficulty from the commencement. The editor has
repeatedly asserted that the Times started ex-
pressly to crush him-which is without the least
shadow of foundation. This fear has goaded him
on to war Of personalities which is uninterest-
ing to the public and Improbable to those con-
cerned. On the Nebraska question we are in
harmony-we willing to fight it together, but
the peculiar course of the Minnesotian led us to