Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1855-03-04
thus lntrOuuCeu OUT relnHrKS:
WHO OWNS THE ORGAN!


We would not impolitely intrude upon the
and the American Organ, of this city, as TO
whether or not the Organ is in part owned by
Abolitionists but we will ask the liberty of
making suggestion or two. We observe that
the Organ states that it is not owned in part
by the proprietor or the publisher of the Ma
tional Era. We observe that the proprietor
the sole proprietor and editor Of the Erd-says
that he has no interest in the American Organ,
and that there is no manner OF sympathy or
affinity between the two papers.
Now, all this is true. We believe it to
be literally true. We believe that the editor
of the Era has neper owned any share of the
Organ.
The Organ Of yesterday, in reply, quoted our
remarks as far as the above extract extends.
That suited its purposes and consisted with its
"tiankness'-it talked of "FRANKNESS."
After quoting the above, it commented as fol-
lows:
ut will be observed that the Sentinel, in the
above paragraph, first changes the issue be-
tween the Enquirer and the Organ, stating
that the controversy is on the point whether
or not the Organ is in part owned by Adolf
tionists?' We shall meet this issue as frankly
as we met the true issue, but we do not mean
to let the Enquirer escape in this mode. The
issue made by the Enquirer is not the one
suggested by the Sentinel; on the contrary,
the Enquirer pointed out the Aboitionist, to
wit: the proprietor Of the Era, as part
owner Of the Organ. We meet one issue at
time, and we do not permit these presses to
shift the issue. IF the Enquirer will first ad-
NIT that its charge was not true; that it has
been promptly met and refuted; and if it will
retract its charge, we will meet any other issue
"The Sentinel is kind hearted in its inten-
tons towards the Enquirer, but we doubt
whether its admission that the editor of the
Era never owned any share Of the Organ,
will be properly appreciated by its ally, whose
charge, on this point, is thus pronounced to be
untrue.
The american Organ passed over in silence
stiAed," "strangled," ignored" (they are its
favorte phrases) the rest of our remarks which
contained the very pith Of the case. They are
as follows:
"But as the Organ is so precise and so
particular in declaring that it IS not in
part owned by Abolitonists, we will be bold
enough to request little more particularly, a
little more precision, little more candor.
Haze not Abolitionists and FIeesoilers hitherto
o,oned share or shares in aR DID not one
of the publishers, contractors, or printers mot
the editor or proprietor) ofhe Era-the Metro
politdn Abolition pdper-own an interest in
the Organ2 These are simple questions that
can be easily answered"
Such we presume is q fair specimen of Know.
nothing candor.
Our questions are unanswered. We repeat
them.a Nor need the Organ think that intelli-
gent readers are to be satisfied or deceived by its
manner of replying to US. There is such
thing as confession by silence; there is such
a thing as confession and avoidance; there is
also such thing as frank, honest, and abso.
lutte confession. We think, that in the present
case, the last mode Of confession would be both
the most upright and the most polite. We
leave that, however, to the Organ.
Our object is but the discovery of truth-not
the interchange Of severe criticism. We there
fore shall leave the above questions to the
frank" consideration of the american Organ,