The Potter journal. [volume] (Coudersport, Pa.) 1857-1872, 1860-03-15
educational
Tor the Potter Journal
The Tables Turned.

JOURNAL OI AlaTcn lSt, pfeleOueu re
ply to my article Of Jan. 9Th. Such a
reply from such a source, regard as
proof not the least satisfactory, of the
justness VI nay cause and the complete
ness of my success. The writings auu
madness Ut its author show how deeply
the arrow penetrated. In his anguish he
.deGlcs himself with his own venom. The
article is too weak to support itself; it
carries on its face its own refutat;on; but
jt deserves notice from the part where 1t
was written, as we'll as from It's malicious
spirit. ~
s Nop, Mr. Rogers, why was it "you did
not write to defend Kenyon Grammar p?
Can you tell? Simply because you could
not. Conscious of your inability to re-
flute the truth, and fearing its light would
expose your own hideous deformi!y, ycu
.vainly tried to obscure it with smoke.
Truly, sir, you attempted all you were ca
pablc of. Though, had you confued Your
self to the object you specified, you would
have been spared no lItllc trouble You
performed nothing that you announced.
Why not? because there was neither
:" arrogance nor "bombast" where you
tried to find it. If there was, why did
YOU not punt it out? name it !? let cth-
ers see it "rebuke it, If there is any
there, it is yours by the best of all rights
that If discovery. Should you find
any stupidity" there, you are welcome
TO IL also, though think nature robbed
Others. 10 bcstow an unusual amount upon
you. Exceptions are said to prove the
rule You have shown the truth of the
proverb - The disciple is not above his
master" The beam in your eye is too
great to come out entire. ! will try and
clip off little. " You rcbuke bembast"?
How could you? The best way to rebukc
any vice is to olhibit the opposite vietue.
Why did you not show the bombast cf
my article? You could not find it. What
do you say to confidently believed, "
august altainments." prcGmnently SUI
perior, "unmistakably'? You ask me
ito sustain my position" Were yol
kenyon's friend, you would not draw at
tcnton to subject which can escape
ccnsure, only by evading observation.
Were you generous enemy you would
not desire to have the subject discussed
again. You have shown how completely,
depressed heart. joint with a corfused
mind. defeats its own purpose. mot
truthful sentence in my article? Is i;
credirable that / could write a piece of
that length without one truth when YOU
could not write half as much without two
first, that "kenyon's Grammar has its
defects" secondly, "Covell's its merits"
How /" stupid to own it !! If my review
was false, why did you not show it? 1t
would have been better for KENYON, more
creditable to you, The fact is, every
word | said was true and every ch"rge |
made | proyed while all your article rests
ON the dogmatical assertion of Nj. Rog.
ers. Had | made single false statement,
you could have easily have proved it,
just as easy as can poye yours fal,e
You say, COvell nowhere defines what
he means by the subject of verb" Look
on page 81. You say the grammar does
not inform one what a finite verb is -
Look on page 40, also, on page la. Now,
sir, you either knew those deliaitious we're
there, or you did not know it? You
knew it? Then you told a malicious
falsehood for the vilest purposes What
Is more atrociouS l. this tho example
you set before your scholars Is this the
morality you inquloate in your nSunday
evening lectures? this the lesson YOU
give from the sacred desk? @. you did
not know it? What is more odious than
lo make an assertion without knowing
whether it is true or false? How dare
you assert what you did not know Is
this the way YOU instruct your classes to
recite? No wonder "they DO not think
grammar dry! How dare you say Weld 5
was better grammar than one you knew
nothing of? How dare you say that even
kenyon's was superior to it? After such
an act, do you fancy that the ipse dirtt
of Rev. VIM. Ii Rogers is to be the end
of controversy" Now on what does
your article rest? How sure one feels of
its truth What satisfaction it must
be to have suoh an instructor How for
tGnate the people who receive the sacred
oraccs from his lips! Hero, sir, would
gladly leays you to sink into the obscu-
Fity ter which nature designed you; but
duty demands that | should instruct 9th
ers, by making negative example of
you.
Ny review presents the undouhted
evidences of an hireling." Why? "a
candid reviewer leaves his readers to
Judge" How would this have benefited
youy When | Judged for you, you cLuld
not see it. Simply because | did not say
at the close Of each argument: this proves
my FIRST point, and this my second, but