Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1859-09-06
r9g- The VindicatOr thinks we erred in adj

ny The Vindicator thinks we erred IN aa-
hitting into our paper the communication "hicn
apneared on the End of August, over the sigma
tnrs of "Conseryator,n on the subject OF Camp
Meetings. Our position is that we did right IN
publishing the piece, and that we could not have
refused to publish it without failure OF eui'
torial duty. Our convictions on the snoJec' are
so clear and decided that it seems to US we can
not fail to satisfy any impartial person Oh 'ne
propriety of our course.
The indicators remarks are oasea uPou "n''
we conceive to be misconceptlon Oh "oOnsef-
vstor,sn nieos. That writer did not charge that
the Methodist Episcopal Church or any OF It's
members were guilty of the various disorders or
improprieties which he alleged were attendant
upon Camp-Meetings. As we understood MN
81 first and still understand him after fresh
,,o-nssl of his communication, he, as we certainly
do believes that the members OF the Ohurcn 'n'
tarasted in the Camp Meeting desired aud intend
ed only to do good; but he alleged ths' owing
TO the assembage of disreputaOle people az su0n
meetings, over whom the managers hau ~ '0u
troll and of whom they would gladly get riu vi
4n-n from their vicious courses if they conld' Ger
tain evils resulted, aad that thus more harm tnan
GOOD ensued. This we understand TO % tue
spirit of the piece, without quoting It's iSnSu"ee'
We knew nothing about the facts OF the case
Int for these the writer was responsible. II he
misrepresented the matter, it could easily 10
shown. and no harm be done to any Individual.
Now the question is, should we have PuoHsneu
the piece2 1t related to matter OF puolle In
forest The writer, so far as we knew, was IN
stigated by no malice or ill-will towards tue
Methodist Church or any OF its MEMBERS anu
only sought to promote the welfare OF the com
munity at large. The mode he selected for call
ing attention to the subject, in order to aissuaus
from the holding of the meeting, was the one which
he regarded as the most efficient. Underthese CIT
cumstances, we did not feel at liberty to refuse
notification, and if we had done so we would,
in our opinion, have been justly cEargeaOle with
muzzling the press and denying the freedom OF
discussion upon matters of public and general III
terest. A few days ago the venerable Natlonai
Inteligencer felt called upon to publish an cult
orial article upon Camp-Meetings IN Virginia
expressing the opinion that unless they could oe
protected by legal enactments from the disorder
ly persons who frequent them, they ought TO Dc
put stop to altogether in every Injected us
triot. No less than three of our exchanges IL
one day published the substance OF this article
Does any one charge that the Intelligencer or the
other newspapers alluded to have assalled th'
Methodist Church7 We have heard no suct
complaint, and presume it will not be made
Much less can we be justly censured for merely
allowing correspondent TO be heard through
our columns We have the satisfaction OF know
ing that our course is sustained by many members
of the Methodist Church, some Of them having
volunteered to tell Us so. And We may mentor
that the very number OF the Spectator "hicl
contained Mr.. Tebbs' Elimination, contained q
so 8 communication from another Minister 0
the Methodist Church, in which LIS writer a.
luded 70 the paper in kid and eoDPh1De-tAr.
terms.
But or friend Of the TiD4eGtor thinks lAs
an editor us bsund, before be admits whole Sd
accusation into his columns, To be satisfied, par
sonally, of its truth" Let rs illustrate. LIS
week we published 3 Communication signet
s"Justice." in which large number Of tax pay
ers generally, and the Commissioners OF the Rev
enue particularly, were taken 70 task. The VII
ter stated that many tax payers did not give II
the whole of their taxable property, and that TIT
Commissioners were delinquent in not putting
every man to his oath. Now what shall be dom
in this case? The Commissioners are highly es
teemed by US as personal friends. twill be yer.
unpleasant to them to see this piece in the paper
Moreover, ace do not E1a0ao that these statement
are true. The writer, to be sure, Is man OF We
racity, who would not Intentionally state.a false
hood or do any one wilful INJURY but still 1t will
be dsagreeable to our friends, the Commission
ers, and therefore, we refuse to publish. VIVA
would every man in the community havethough
of us if we had pursued such courses Ih'
Vindicator surely will not say that 1t was ou
duty before publishing to examine the Commis
sioner's Books and travel about the county to as
certain for ourselves that the allegations of the
writer were true Upon precisely similar
grounds we Justify the publication of the piec'
signed "Conseryator.n In the one case there
were two persons who might possibly feel ag
grieved, in the other more than that number
This seems to US the only difference.
In regard to the deleetable communication
signed "Parnassus," we have but little to say
There is a littleness about the whole article wei
calculated to excite the most profound commis
Grafton. The Rev Mr.. Tebbs, in the letter which
he saw fit to address TO u.s. took occasion to allude
to the patronage bestowed upon the Spectator
by the members of the Methodist Church, and
now we have this anonymous writer expressing
his unwilliuguess "to assist any sheet which is
filled with such contemplate slurs against form
of worship which is identified with one particu
lar denomination" and declaring without blush
this is what he ''means by holding the editor re-
sponsible.n And in another part of his article
he again presents for our reflection the sordid
consideration that "they 1.-THE Methodistsl may
learn where to bestow their patronage" Now,
we have only to tell this writer that we have
never asked him to assist our paper, and have
but little doubt that he would gladly damage Its
interests to any extent in his power. de much
mistakes the editors of this paper if he supposeS
that they are governed in their course by any
such paltry consideration as that which seems
to be held in the highest estimation by himself;