The River Falls journal. (River Falls, Pierce County, Wis.) 1857-1861, 1859-02-09

s,,, that at the time or rc;oindcr was written
the remarks vera net penned; and they were
misplaced by the printer. That they ale eva
sions is far more "easy to assert than to prove.
You are perfectly well aware that. at the
time we sent our re;oihdcr to you, we expect
ed your reply was 10 be published entire; and,
had this been done, it would have obviated all
necessity of our making any remarks, and the
Whole matter would have been too palpablc to
have rendered comment necessary. But you
subsequently,, "retractcd" PORTION of that re-
ply, and asked Us to have 1t "expunged."
And we asure you, Gentlemen, that any fur
ther information you may demand "contiden-
tally Through the columns of the jour
NAL" viii be forthcoming. and when fur
nished, it will not be difficult to disc over "the
relation which they We're designed to hold to
this discussion" and your irony may loose
some Of It's remarkable sharpness.
In relation to those new conditions, we would
say that we referred 70 the fact that you stated
that "you are TO discuss with us, Or We with
you the restion of dancing and card
playing. upon the basis of morals, and religion
as believed BY as TO be taught in the Bible"
We agreed to discuss the resolution as it stands
al the head of this article.
You next devote over one column to an elab-
crate and brilliant defense of Mr.. Gibson's
article. We hardly know which most to add
mire, the article by Gibson, the defense
by Stevens. The one is bold and direct, the
other, cautious and insinuatlng the one, re-
morseless and sweeping in its conclusions, the
other, mincing and ambiguous in its deduc-
tons. Gibson fills us with admiration for The
reckless bravery with which he rushcs to the
logical result Stevens apazes US with the
skill and variety of his evolutions.
You state that we Inexperienced Mr. Glib
on's article. and unintentionally misrepresent-
ed him. Next You charge us with willfully
ignoring the point of his Argument. Afte
speaking of the depravity and snfulness o
the "unrcgcnerate, he says, whatever they
really love and take pleasure in, therefore par
takes of the same nature with Themselves
And again, we ask seriously can amuse-
ments which appear to be the supreme delight
of hearts opposed to God, be at the same time
the delight Of hearts that love God. Certain
" not We claim that we drew the only
logical inference and we leave it to- discrimi-
mating people..to decide.
After using about two columns in vain at
tcmpts TO start your engine, you finally pro-
fcss 10 come to the question at issue" But
like the pendulum of clock, which holds by
turns the two extremes, you again vibrate, and
expand over nearly two columns more, when
You again "turn TO advance some thought o
our (your) own on the question of issue"
This WIS a decidedly happy "turn'' in your
article. After perrsing between two and three
long columns, made up of ridiculc, and irony.
and sarcasm, it was, indeed, happy relief to
find at last. that you had actually concluded
to turn to advance some thoughts of your
own on the question of issue" We agree with
you, that. in this article, you had advanced no
thoughts of your own, upon the affirmative of
the resolution. before this eventful period. But
such thoughts as you did advance demand per
haps, passing notice.
You ask why we inserted the phrase, ''as
practced by the people of this village. You
Suspect that some concealed beauties lie hid
behind that CURTAIN" 1--WE hope it viii be with
drawn" &c.
But "unfortunately COR the log C of your
article, we never "inserted that phrase"
so YOUR Buncombe, "without any request
from u.s." explodes like bubble upon be-
ing touched. The phrase was incorpora-
ted in the original resolution, as you are
well aware, and it looks like straining at
gate and swallowing saw-mil, when
YOU attempt to show that we have ''inser-
ted it without any request from U.s.
Neither have we 'ignored" this phrase,
nor are we disposed to. You seem to
suppose that it is our business to take the
affirmative, in this discussion, hence you
tell us ''we had hoped you would set
forth" &c. Now it is your business to "set
FORTH" and not ours. 1t is your business
to ''set forth" facts in relation to tt csc
practices here, and to show what their
effects are, ours to refute it if we can. So
YOU will discover that ''this little quail
flying phrase" ''ne,cr dropped OUT of
our premises.
We trust that you will ''feel much oblig
ed to us for pointing out these broken
links in your logic. 1t may lead you to
make a stronger chain by proving them
wrong in those cases and then a fork
factory they must be un-praiseworthy
as praeticed by the people of this village
TNorr.-Gentlcmen; We trust you will use
the English language, in the construction of
YOUR sentences. since you will i.ldily discov.
er that we are not classical scholars; and four
| friends will please pardon the allusion] it IS.
at least. presumable. that more than one half
the readers of the JOURNAL, are III the came
condition.
You seem to be greatly exercised about
our unfortunate logic. Let US examine
yours. In one place YOU say you sup
pose dancing and card playing exists here
| as elsewhere. Again you say admitting
that it is innocent as practiced in other
places it does not prove that it is innocent
rs praeticed here.
Now if it is practieed here as elsewhere
and it is innocent in other places, how
does it happen that it is not innocent as
practiced here?
You find fault with us for inserting the
phrase, '.as practiccd in this village" and
II ,,at ,,n,,,,loip Of nc for i,rnoriprr n IN