The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1859-02-03

SeiI-Sohstccu taise hOO0.
Our last number contained the following
challenge TO the Umnesoian, in reference to
an alleged instance of plagiarism by this
paper 10 August last:
Our answer 70 this ID, that II the editor Of the
Minnssoiian will prove the above assertion, the
wr'fer cf This rN, in hs name. gips 10 the Mer.
canfM Library AssoeidiiDn Of this city, one hun.
dred dollars. the sufiiciency Of the proof to be
determined by any officer Of the Association,
'sisefed by the Minns,otian sdttor him,siT. We
will not restrict the proposition to the terms
Indicated by the Mtnnssotian. But furthermo
IRE pN gre The Dfsrehantiis Lab, airy AssociaiiOn
one hundred dollars il the editor Of the Mime.
s0sian Will furnish Any proof that any Of the
Thoughts" claimed as original in the article in
question were plsgiarized from the Review in
question, or from any other Review, or any
other book, pamphlet, or periodical.
we exact no other penalty for failure than the
odium which crowns convicted fslsehood.
In the above challenge it will be seen, the
M'nne'otian editor is explicitly exempted
from any pecuniary penalty il he fa'ls--
while we offer to give him one hundred dol.
lars for the benefit Of the Library Associa.
ton, II he succeeds in proving the charge in
question. TO give him every chance OF sue.
cess we refer the question to any officer of the
very society interested, by the terms of our
proposition. in deciding against us-and
give him the further advantage of selecting
the referee himself.
Now It is sufficient to say that yesterday
the U,nneso.,an editor refuses 10 accept the
challenge. And in order to conceal the full
measure of the ignominy which he incurs by
this refuial, he finds it necessary to sneak
from the plain terms Of our proposition, be-
hind this disgraceful Interpolation Of bis
own
The Question Of the Plagiarism" committed
by the literary % editor Of the fionser, from
the Vsstmins!s, Rsr's'c. 10 referred by him to
The decis,on Of a ,cagsr for 800. There is one
difficulty about our entering upon such an ar
bilrament. We harsnt The hundred dollars
As il any one suspected him Of having a
hundred dollars He was not required to
jeopardze cent on the result.
And yet, with the very drop Of ink in
which be records, under this disgracefnl
shit, the confession of his falsebood he has
the audacity to refer everybody to the
Westminster Rer,c,r, ard PIONEER AND DEM
ocRAr" Of six months ago. with the modest
expectation that as those documents are gen
orally beyond reach, his readers will take
for granted an assertion, for which, he ia
obliged to confess, with every circumstance
of gnominy, that he can produce no proof
whatever.
The only excuse We can offer our read
era for obtrudng on their notice u mere
matter Of personal viuiicalion is, that it
enables us to fix fnal standard OF
credibili,y to which the public may refer
other statements Of the Nanesot,an, which
are either too insignificant, or too prcpos-
! ferrous for formal editorial notice and the Sc
| quel will serve to show the convicted pla
garist o. the Mnn0oflan that in paving his
beaten track ofepithets with Westminster
Reviews" and "plagiarists. and systematic
stealings," he has simply furnished stones to
ding at bis own head