The Winchester home journal. [volume] (Winchester, Tenn.) 1857-1858, 1858-02-27
University Of the South.
DEcuERp, Feb. %, 1858,

peared in the Nashville Patriot, over
the signature of Warren, which are
calculated, if not intended, to injure
the University Of the South, and also
the State of Tennessee. Those arti-
cles indicate that they were written
by some one whose mind had received
the polish Of education, and was stor-
ed with the flowers Of poetry, but who
had unfortunately formed lo,c associa-
tons, as indicated by an occasional
slang phrase.
The prime object of those articles
was the destruction of public conf
dence in Sewanee as a location for
the University; and as I have been
engaged in the practice of medicine
for many years in the vicinity of Sc
vance, thereby becoming thoroughly
acquainted with that locality in every
respect, it was but natural when ]
saw the false charges that the writer
Of those articles was bringing up
against that location tina. should feel
disposed to refutc them to the extent
of my ability-the result Of which was
that was soon engaged in a ncwspa-
per controversy with the writer of
those articles, which ! was disposed to
terminate after the publication Of the
Proceedings of a meeting of the citi-
zens of Franklin county, in Winches-
ter, on the lst inst, followed by the
card of DR.. Wallace Estill, whose
age and experience enable him to
speak as no other man can speak on
the subject in controversy.
But the writer of those articles has
seen proper to furnish the Patriot will
a third article. which is less devoted
to the discussion of the grave subject
at issue, than to ridculing me.
could retaliate in the same style, but
would scorn to descend to such leuel
|. however, propose furnishing another
article for the press. on the important
subject under consideration, and a.
the Patriot declines publishing any
more articles on that subject, mus
ask the favor Of aplace in your vaIu
able journal.
The writer of those articles charge
me with misrcprcscnting him in the
application Of the term imbccile, u >cd
by him in his first article. deny the
charge; first. because there is no ne
cessity for misreprescnting a man whc
represents himself us badly as he does
secondly, because | cannot make the
term as used in the connection by hin
refer to any other than a Bishop. I,ir
common with every body else in thi,
country who read his first article, I'M
derstood him to be speaking Of a Bish
op when he used the term imbecilc
and we supposed him to be alIuding t.
Bishop Polk. ! have never yet seer
the man, who read the article, VIII,
did not understand him to refer to
Bishop when he used the term. Hun
dreds of gentlemen, after having rea,
the article, have expressed themselve
in the most abhorrent terms of a mai
who could skulll behind a fictitiou
name, and stab the character of al
old and venerable Bishop. If I mis-
construed his meaning, so have hun
dreds of other gentlemen in differen
parts Of the country, who were paine'
to see a good and great man treated
in so ungentlemanly and unchristial
a manner. And instead of overlook
ing this matter in my first article,
had direct reference to it when | sait
that | supposed that gentlemen occu
pying their position could well afior'
to treat him with silent contempt
And how ne could have failed to OBJ
serve that in his second article,
cannot imagine, unless he were labor
ing under an attack of the kind him
self. And it is difficult to understand
his remark in his second article, il
reference to the distinguished gentle
man, that he would be willing to hea
expound a text, in any other wa.