The Yazoo Democrat. [volume] (Yazoo City, Miss.) 1858-18??, 1859-07-02

NU MBER "A.
COL. SINGLETON.

Very luckily for this talented gentleman be has
excited the entire hostility of the Lexington
Advertiser In connection with him we had in
tended to notice the remarks in the last issue Of
that paper but knowing the impossiblity Of foro-
ing it to fair argument, we abandoned our design.
Ydzoo Democrat.
In our discussion with the Democrat we have
not only endeavored to use none but fair and egit-
innate argument but we have also confined ourself
to strictly courteous language-free from the
slightest nuendo: we cannot say that the Demo-
crat has pursued altogether the same course,
whether it so intended or not. Certainly the
Democrat has no cause Of complaint for any want
Of "fair argument on our pIrt--if there is any
cause of complaint it lies with us. The article
to which the above extract aludes, was, in itself,
written to correct the Democrats perversion of
views and we are now again compelled to
TO like service. In its last issue the Democrat
creates the impression that we charged Singleton
as being dishonest" venal aud corrupt'-and
thereupon bases its remarks. In reply to this,
we can but simply state. that matter bow in
different or insignificant if you will we may have
conceived Singleton to be, both as politician ard
statesman, still we have never questioned his
being an honest, affable gentleman and we ohal-
lenge the Democrat to point to q single line writ
ter by ourself which would warrant such deluc-
ton. We have frequently copied finished extracts
upon which we wished to comment, but the Dem
ocrat never. Under these circumstances has the
Democrat any cause to complain?
Lexington Adgertiser.
We quote the above with great pleasure as
disclaimer by the advertiser of any intention to
charge corruption upon our distiuguishel and
popular representative, Col. Singleton. His arti-
c,e certainly did force the clear conviction upon
our mind that it was an attempt to convey the
idea that Col. s was politician whose course
was governed solely by the direction of sluices
from the &" treasury pap" 1t is still our opinion
that the Advertiser did, g plainly as words
could charge our Congressman with obliqpity
fully equivalent to "yen ,lity, corruption and
lemagoguism" We are now SO firmly convinced
Of this as to be willing to lay small wager that
the Advertiser could not be induced to ropubish
its short editorial after the above disclaimer. We
have unfortunately lost it, or our readers should
have the benefit of its perusal. However, the
above disclaims any intention, &c, AMI the quo
amino is all that should be euquired into where
a Know Nothing paper is concerned. 1t is not
to be supp sed that an organ of that party under
stands the signifcation Of language.
! In reference to "courteous language" Sc, al
luded to above, we must confess that very few Of
the editorials of the Advertiser in reference to
Col. Singleton or this paper can be strictly SO
characterized We have no doubt, however, OF
the Advertisers having intended them to be So
We must also do ourself the justice to say that if
any words haye appeared in our columns relating
TO the Lexington Advertiser, which the squeamlsh
stomach of that chvalrous journal could reject
as personal discourtesy, such words have most
undesignedly so appeared We have not the
pleasure of personal acquaintance with the
editor of that paper, but take it for granted he
is very gentlemahly, clever fellow LAHeIcdI
acceptdtjon Of cysrer), but we are nevertheless
thoroughly imbued, penetrated, and permeated,
with the opinion that, politically, he is a great
reprobate This is not so much his fault how
ever, as his misfortune When men are once
deranged in politics, it seems that neither reso-
luton nor reason can set them right.
The Advertiser is again mistaken in the sen-
tence before the last. We have neuer failed to
copy usrbatim the gist Of any editorial we designed
to notice, whereas our experience with the Adver
tiser finds him not faultless in this particular
With regard to that sentence then, there is
slight difference of opinion between the Adverti-
tiser and oursef We think the penultimate SEN
tence of the editorial copied above is wholly ncor-
rect-that journal thinks it entirely correct.
Men will lffer, but they need not therefore quar-
rel, and we sincerely hope that the stream of
controversy between the Advertiser and ourse,f
NAV in future flow on smoothly, AMI never be
interrupted by the slightest ripple Of personal
misunderstanding.