The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994, 1859-11-16
. For the "Spirit.'
Examiners and Examinations.
To the Honorable Edward Archbold.

To the Honorable Edward Archbeld.
My dear, cool-headed. warm hearted,
clever, genial, witty, wise, brilliant, spark
ling, thoughtful, distinguished, celebrated,
even-tempered, gentlemanly friend, yonr
very kind notice of me and my writings,
does me so much honor, and my regards for
you are such, that cannot longer desist
from an acknowledgement of you: favor,
i'll the Spirit of Nov. End. / choose
to address yon, rather than the public, be-
cause think yom more interested in
what l shall say, than any one else can
be, and because l have, already, l thIuk,
satisfied the public that all those charges
that l made against The Board of Exam
iners, in my short article of Sept. 25lh
were true
Your very Warm regards for me have
betrayed you irto low, vulgar, style OF
abuse and vituperaiion, EN- irely inconi-
patible with that manly dignity for which
you are so justly famed; and which the
Life of Patton" SO very appropriately
terms the Lofty style of Defamation OF
Archbold ---. ..
ou cannot, however, expect M. to de-
scend to such abuse. Your personal
character, shall be sucred from my touch,
at least for the present. Your putlic
character, in any other capacity than that
of School Examiner" and champion of
the Board" shall not he assaied by me.
The cause for which argue rests upon
truth. and needs not the adventitious aid
Of BiLingsgate aud Slander. In war of
personalities, l should, by all odds, have
The advantage of you. You should there
fore, have more sense thar to provoke me
to combat, in which you could have no
hopes of success. However certain |
might feel of victory, were to attack You
personally, l should scorn to do so. l
trust that l an q "wiser, worthier, and
better man" than he who, when beaten
upon the merits of question, will aban-
don the subject, and attack the character
of his opponent. ~ aa1
The vile, abusive spirit of your article
betrays your want Of truth to support
you. Every candid reader can see that
your attack upon me, is only sneaking
subterfnge, designed to divert the mind
from the question at issue; and your silly
attempt to drive me TO defense of my
self, shows to every body that l have al
ready "won," Notwithstanding your con-
fident assertion that "shaH not acin.'
care nothing for the slanderous as
ser,ions which you make against me:
They pass by me as the idle wind which
regard not am like the great man
who, when told that some one had spoken
of him, said, at makes no difference
Those who know me, will not believe evil
reports against me, and it doesn't matter
what those believe, who don't know me"
l have this advantage, however, of the
person referred to,--bcsides those who
know me not believing you, those who
know you, will make due allowance for
occasional infractiens of the 9th COM
mandment. lt sgs -r-
Your warna feeling for me has caused
you to almost neglect that time honcred
principle which is so repeatedly enjoined
in the Bible, viz. truth. Your reckless
ness, in making assertions which you
must know are utterly untrue, is some.
what astonishing; and | am almost led
to believe that you are prematurely in
your dotag ge; for 1 certainly think that
there was q time, when the Hon. Edward
Archbold, wasa man, who detested any thing
like tampering with the truth. But, no"
you seem to have lest all that manl;ncss
that dignity, that high-:oned morality, fol
which you have long been celebrated
The spirit of your Article reminds me O
Pope's description of one of the heroes
of his "Duncind;" and think it ftly de
scribes yom while writing your last arti
Gle:
"Swearing and supperiess the hero safe,
Blasphelned the gods, and damned his fate
Fierce gnawed his pen, then dashed it OF
the ground; -
Plunged for his sense, but there no bottom
u found; so . rEEs
Yet wrote and foundered on in mad despair
MOI needing what vile trash he'd there."
You; memory or your veracity is Ger
tainly a: fault, when you. deny having
charged ."Mr. Teacher" with being on'
Of "the rejected" To replying to m.
first article, you use the following Ian
guage: The Board is not attacked 70
neglect of duty, but for honest, faithful
and impartial discharge of duty. A
clamor of disappointed candidates ha
been rising and increasing for the last TIVE
or three years; and "Mr. Teacher" onl.
wells his private griefs under guise o
public spirit" You then 60 on to de
fend the Board against the complaints o
rejected candidates. This is the burdcl
of the first half of your article. If tn
Language you used does not convey tn
idea that "Mr. Teacher" was one of "th
rejected" it doesn't convey any idea a
all. can't affirm that you intended t.
mean so: hardly think you know your
self, what you did mean.
In quoting from you, I have taken tn
tlihertv To chaape ssruiStn0n to yiSin0 -,