Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1858-09-07
Mr. TYLER AND MR. YANcEy.s LETTER.

tior Of Saturday upon hic. we choose to Offer any
r-mark. Mr.. Tyler craracerses our construction OF
Mr.. Yapc.y's note al uncandld y aud "prep0ste
rous We are sure no discour,esy WAS intended by
the iormer epther, aud we shall regard il merely As
declaration of opinion on Mr. Tylers part that W.
placed an erroneous Interpretation on Mr.: ancey :
language. Let settle this matter. Mr. Tyler shys
il is unwarrantabe aud prepcaterous 10 contend that
Mr.. Yancey meant to imply an assurances that his
communication was to appear in the "Enqurer only
in the event Of its rejection bv The South. Now
thess are Mr.. YsDcey's words II you shall refuse
me tie justice of publishing IL ',qn-.t 'hai 1t De
banded over 10 the Editor OF the Ell quirer. We
submit, 10 all fair minded men. II bs language does
not clearly convey an assurance that MIR. fancey III
tends his communication for The South III the first
instance, aud that il is 10 appear in The Enquirer
only in the event of refusal 10 insert it. At any
rate. such the opinion Of MIR. Tyler; for, in hi"
first letter to the Editor Of The South" he expressly
Gays, MIR. Yancey requests me to publish the matter
sHoULD you DECLINE IT. In other words, Mr. Tyler
is requested TO publish the communication only in tie
event that refuse to Insert it. Our construction OF
Mr.. Yancey's note may be uDcandd And pre-
posterous" but it certainly has the sancfion OF MIR
Ty-rs critical judgment Richmond South, Sep
TENDER 6.
In he abeeuoe Of Mr.. Tyler, we do not hesitate to
respond Immediately to the foregoing article taker
from The South Of yesterday. We can see 20 ne
c.ssy for attributng to Mr. Tyler alone the editoria
which appeared in our issue of Saturday. In fact i
was prepared by another editor. The expression o
opinion complained Of issued under the following
circumstances: Mr.. Yancey's request thst bis letei
should be published i'll tbs "ELqcirer. II refused by
"Tne South was interpreted by the latter as ex-
pressing promise that it should Ho be published IL
the "Enauirer," If Published by Tho South" Thi'
paipabie non sequitur made thu ground OF az
accusation charging want of candcr on Mr.. Yaucey
We replied that tho charge i,self uDcandid ant
preposterous. 1.-The South" made the issue of q
want Of caudor one side or the other. We had 4
right, and indeed circumstances rendered it incum
bent Oh us TO express all opinion on The subject A.
for the question Of courtesy, We certainly have nc
desire to uAict unnecessary pain or modification on
apy one connected with THE South" But, in q
question where right and justice are concerned, We
are not prone to permit nice distinctions between
courtesy aud discourtesy 10 defer the thorough vind
cation of personal political friend especially when
that friend hsppsns to be prominent Democratic
statesman whose fair fame is 10 some extent identified
with the interests of the psriy to which We belong.
Our expressed opinion il An honest one, and, under
the c-umstances do not feel authorized 10 re,ract
the expression. To mind, IL. reasoning by which
it has been attempted to convict Mr.. Yancey Of ii
want Of csndor is 90 rrepostsrccs he to Cfer very
strong evidence of the sccu-sr's own deficiency in
that respect. Ii hs 10 considered involving moth
ing dscourtsous, no ons vii! be better pleased than
We If regarded ~ necessarily ii .,urteous, We can
only rerI,; TO orcL.nss .h.c bav. nccessita-
ted tho expression. II einr. csso. believe Il at
We have gone no further than we could houorst' "
avoid.
Now, "Fhe South" appIi-s tine same incorrect ccn-
struction to Mr. Tyers letter which it previously sp.
plisd to that of Mr.. Yanc.y. We submit, that Mr..
Tylera assertion, Mr. Yanc-y requests me to publish
the matter, should you decline IT," by no means de-
nes the fact Of an additional quest that it should be
reproduced in the Enquirer" after ts publication in
"Ths South" Nor wac it NJ all requisite to The inte
res, of The South" nor did any necessity or any
dictate whatever of proprety require that Mr. Tyler
should inform The South" ofthis additional request.
Thus, "Tbe South's" construction Of Mr. Yanceys
note has not "he sanction of Mr.. Tyler's critical
Judgment" and the note Of tho latter gentleman can
not DO properly construed intending any such
sanc.ion Indeed, Mr.. Tyler could not knowingly
have given any such sanction since at ths time his
own letter written to The South" he was in
the following expressions:
Il wish il 10 appear 10 The South from which il will
reach mass Of readers thar it would no, otherwise
re.ch should be pleased to zee il sp-
pear in the 'Epquirer. also, although quite lengthy"
Now it cannot be pretended ths, Mr.. Tyler, al
honorsbs gentleman and an earnest Christian. has
made written statement 10 THE South" which he
knew OF tho time 10 be false.