The Potter journal. [volume] (Coudersport, Pa.) 1857-1872, 1860-03-15
Look at your own terms.

of your own mouth Yet no one believes
You was hired. You will never be ac-
cused of it. The viiest hireling docs not
Insult the understanding of his readers.
If 1 wished to injure any one | would
engage YOU to write in his favor.
"Candid reviewers present both sides. ="
What of it? Did | pretend to be re-
viewer? | said, Il wished to give my
thoughts upon text books, and my rea-
sons for rejecting one found here OF
course, | Was hired because | did not tell
why it should be retained. What un-
doubted evidence" Of my corruption =
How stupid" you are not to discern my
object! What subject 10 fill the char
of inte'tectuat philosophy How the del
icate frame must droop under the action
of such mind! l chose to convey my
instruction in concrete form that 1t
might be the better understood. What
did you do? You wrote not one word
that could be read with pleasure or re-
metLberc with lroit. kept to the
subject and fulfilled my promise. You
'.eplied to criticisms aud said nothing
to the point. | Iscorncd slander, slang and
falsehood. You said little or nothing else
have proved it, and you cannot refnte
it. Why did you say | was hired? Was
it because [ dared to tell the truth in d.
rect and unequivocal terms? The truth
will always stand, and you need not fear
any one will overthrow it. Why did you
Judge | was hired? Can you compre
bend no higher motives than those which
influence you? Do you think others as
venal as yourself? Yet | can hardly
blame you Were compelled to live on
the pittancc you receive, | might think
more of few cents. A good teacher car
live without descending to such means
You arc very unfortunate in all your al
Alsions You referred to Yale College
| have no reason to be ashamed # her
and I hope she never will be Of me; at
least, will try not TO disgrace her. You
mentioned "leviews of Webster aud San,
dcrs." You did not say that you take
Sanders but do not provide your scholars
with Webster, while We reject Sanders
ahd use Webster. | will tell you some,
thing ccufd ntially. If you would Ike
to see Il pictures in &" Web,ter's revised
edition" YOU may Iovk at ours, providing
you will keep out of tie ''mud' and not
3" dirty" it. DO not imagine we could
receive you as a student-we take Unl,
advanced scholars You quoted "our
circular / return tue intended favor
by saying, yours is modelled after poo,
one ours original You did not modify
1t to suit the nature of the new institu
ton, but burdcncd an infant with tetrers
that manhood cannot endure. When you
wanted text books, instead Of examining
aud knowing, YOU took such as your pat
tern presented We chose such books a.
we knew had merits. If there is any
thing that the patrons Of this institution
have reason to be proud Of, 1t is that the
text books and books of reference are not
inferior to those used in any institution
in the country. Your principal has re
ceived some hintS from here which may
be of advantage to your school. Should
the institution survive the baleful effects
o. your friendship, aud he ever want to
introduce Chemistry aud Philosophy, /
have no doubt he will use John A. Por.
ter's Chemistry. and Quackenba PhiIos-
oPhy Should you publish another CIR,
cular, | think yon will not forbid the as
sociation of those who have been Intimate
from childhood, nor claim the privilege
of visiting the young ladies rooms at ali
hours, nor put down free lectures under
the head of extras. There is another
difference we do not advertise "ali b,ok>
10 be had here" and then send our stu
dents thirty miles to pay more for Old
books than the retail price of new ones
You say, Covel's Grammar has its mer
its, that of being "modeled after good
one" You are very partial to limitations.
| am not. What constitutes a merit in
your view, is a demerit in mine But
you find fault with it. A person who
looks through green eye glasses thinks
everything green. 1t shows the medium
through Whlch you look. ", out you
quoted from the book true, aud you told
things about it without any regard to We
racity. But did l say it was perfect
Did [ say it had no superior in the Ian
guage? | said | thought 1t the best |
had examined, and then you accused me
OF your own vice, as though you knew
NV own oDluion better than did Shoulu
you say you thought Kenyou's grammar
better than any other, | should not be
justified in calling it falsehood, though
| would have good reason to laugh at
your folly. Now, Mr.. Rogers, | must
BID you an eternal farewell | early in
life resolved to associate only with the
wise aud virtuous. | think the lowest
vice is, to disregard the truth. I have
given Won a rood lesson Should you re