Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1855-07-18
g PECCAVI.3

A'oNi|~'
----<s<--
. PECCAVI."
WE fear, from the silence Of " ROSE COTTAGE"
since our little passage at arms of last month"; that we
said something rude for the occasion. Whatever
it was we assure our talented and avorite correspon
dent that we are truly penitent. An expression that
We used was perhaps significant than We design:
ed it to be- We take shame TO ourself for not having
been more guarded and very respectfully ask forgive
ness. Such approach 10 ilmanners will be avoided
by us in future. Perhaps this apology is neither look
ed for nor desired by "RosE COTTAGE" Yet it is
none the less our duty to render it.
"NEos EPIsCOPOs'' AND oURSELF.
AN unusual and, as We regard it, very absurd
personal collision is at this time defacng our paper
We shall ;endeayor to dispose Of it at once, feeling
assured that our readers find no entertainment in
such stuff.
We ask them first to examine brief piece of last
week and TO decide whether there is any thing in IT
spitelu or " superciHous." According to our under.
standing of "NEos EPIscoPos" he had clearly indi-
Gated Know Nothing afTuities. He knew this to be
utterly anagonisic TO the declared principles Of the
Advertiser Yet without the least respect for those
principles without much the courtesy OF Offering
the editor an opportunity of advice in the matter, he
comes out with a sneer at the famous STEPHENS
letter. (specch you should have said, friend EPIsco.
rosy and parades with the pride Of parzan, some
thing which he conceives to be triumphant reply to
portion of that speech. But previous 10 this, "NEos
Eprscoros' (as we were casually nforrned) had un-
dertaken TO exercise sort of censorship over other
selections of ours upon this political subject
r.. or, a., Il, hy writer
to Judge BUTLER, (and which We repnblished,) had
the misfortune to call down his condemnation. Had
it been in public conversation, or in conference with
oursef that this thing occurred, we should not have
regarded it for moment But such does not seem 10
have been the choice Of our associate. In conversa'
ton with another person, in tile very Office OF The
ADVERTISER Qhe editor absent and not dreaming Of
such hing) Mr.. w. dropshis word of dsaPprobation
OF course thewhoe office hears it, and We, no matter
how are informed Of the circumstance. We are in.
censed at the moment, every other editor OF the
least sefrespect would be, but content ourse with
short paragraph entitled 'T The Know Nothing Argu.
msn." in which we speak Of the common beraliy
as we'll of Catholics as Of Protestants. Upon opening
the next ensuing copy of our paper We find selection
| by Mos EPIscopos, which IN connection with pre-.
ceding circumstances, convinces us that his feelings
are with the Know Notlings and that he designs to
hoist that banner in the religious department OF the
Advertiser" We Immediately write distinct
disclaimer Of the political indications thus given out
by him, hoping that its timely appearance would have
the double effect Of righng the paper before the pub
lie and of confnng it's religious reading IN future 10
the placid lessons Of Christian morality as contra.
distinguished from the turbulent upheavings OF con.
troversy, whether partzan sectarian Such is The
head and front Of onr offending, by which NEos
EpIscopos" has felt himself mpeed 10 come out this
week in long article over his proper signature
| Our comments upon this article shall be brief
Imprimo there is an italicized expression in Mr..
WnATlEY's third paragraph which would seem to re-
| ouire word of explanation. We care not Tor the
slight conveyed by the words " did not know you IN
the transaction" Mr.. WHATLEY is assured that we
knew him. The gentemanIy junior proprietor OF this
paper consulted with us upon Mr. W's proposition,
previous 10 its acceptance If Mr.. w. in mis- sefpro-
posed arrangements ignored our edIorsh'p oi Inc
"Adtertiser," Mr.. D. r. DURIsoE did not And 'oe
regarded the matter one in which we had voice.
The display of the fact that associate d.d not
kno us in the TRANSACTION is at least no very marked
evidence of the en ship he speaks of in the concin'
| SION of his present article.
S.cundo, as to the "pcn and ink sketch.' We
cannot see why it should be regarded SO very bold
in us to draw our conclusions other men do Espe'
cially are we at loss in this regard when those con-
clusions (however formed prove to be entirely true.
We did not accuse "NEos EriscoPos" OF political
wrangling, past or present. We did not say That ms
/" manner of life had been such rs TO commit MN 10
the declaration Of political principles or preferences
We did not announce that he had in days gone by
mingled in "the s,rifes of conending parties" We
said nothing of any proclivy Of his towards the
,inrs" All this was no part of any "pcn and INK
sketch" of ours We only thought land wrote as we
shoughp that his style and tone indicated opPos'-
on to the declared principles Of our sheet That we
thought and wrote gh is rendered clear by the de-
yelopments of Mr. WIS article Of this week Precise.
y as we supposed he differs with us in toto SO far as
he declares himself in regard to the Know Nothing
platform Was it bold" in US TO draw conclusions
last week which Mr. w. himself suhstantiases this
Tertio, MIR. WHATLEY says he will send us "two
sets" of Know Nothing principles to be published IN
the Aduertiser, said publication being Gn his opin-
ion "Jeter than TO suppress for party purposes, that
,uhich the people haue right to scc." Talk OF our
"boldness forsooth There is old text that occurs
| to US here but which we will not make mention oi
further than to say that it contrasts "bsam" and
&c mote in striking juxtaposton. We challenge crltl'
csm as to the fairness of paper in all disputes.
We have ever published for the side freely as
for the other Our politics maintain Of course,
whether in our editorials or our selections. Can We
do otherwise But yet our paper is known by all to
afford the opportunity Of free and fair fighting TO any
who respectfully ask place in our columns. And
the fling of Mr. w. implying the reverse, is at once
bold" and unsupported by the record.
OfMr WnArLEY's political principles, as enuncia'
led this week, we have very little 10 say:
The blended idea Of favorng the political proScrlp
ton of foreigners as general rule, and condemning
it in particular cases, that we are not prepar ed
to appreciate. Ifyou prescribe at all how are you to
avoid prescribing altogether! Or if you design pro.
scrbing only in part, what tribunal il to designate
those worthy Of prescription and those who are not
How will you word constitutional amendment which
is 10 prescribe bad foreigners and not good ones
| Would it not be ornament, now and bewilderng,
to any modern code Of laws!
As 10 advocating an "entre separation Of Church
and State" who in America dreams Of any thing else
TO point this out as peculiar feature Of Know Moth
ingism is laughable.
Mr. W. is a Know Nothing, dyed in the wool, ," &C.,
when i. comes to opposing The promotion Of those who
would violate ",lat Heaven.descended and dearest
of all privileges, the right Of conscience But who
are they that would do this wckedness in our country