The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1867-08-20
OUR CORRESPONDENTS AND THE
SOUTH CAROLINA RAILROAD

| 5oOIh ShNoLINA IthlLNOAD.
Wo have uniformly underworld in tho dis
charge of our duties 10 coniinc ourselves strict
ly to our own business; and il is our intention
to continue 10 do SO in future; however un-
tasteful such course may be 10 city paper,
which displays chronic anxiety to draw us
into controversy upon some point or other.
Thus, on Saturday last, we were honored in
snid paper by Two separate articles, in cach Of
which our name was taken in ynin-thirteen
times on the first page and three times on tho
second page. Too much honor. We of course
feel highly iiattcred at so much "notice" from
so distinguished n source but as wo have never
made my prctensions to rcciprocae ii, we be-
gin TO feel uncomfortable under crushing
sense Of obligation.
We know our cOtcmpOrary is the very quint-
essence of courtesy, and, therefore, would not
be guilty of intermeddling in affairs with which
ii has no special concern. We, therefore, clear
it of that charge, however some may think
that lis late railroad articles, answering Tma
News, when not called upon for any answer,
has the appearance Of intcrmeddling.
It was quite correct in saying that s,TnE
News has no prejudice in this matter" We
| have not tho slightest. We consider ourselves
as stnunch frcnd of the South Carolina Rail
road as our cotemporary considers itself, and
We have on many occasions given proof of it.
We must be excused, therefore, if we prefer 10
pursue our own course in the matter, and de-
! cline TO yield to the dictation Of outsiders.
ltistrue our correspondent "a b. c." is anon
| newspaper correspondents in this country
| generally, almost universally, writo without
appcnding their true signature. The anony-
nous character of tho communication, there
fore, was not sufficient reason for rejecting
it. The letter is Que of n series that is being
written for and published in THE NEWS, by m
old and distinguished merchant of this city--a
man perfectly responsible for all he says or
does; md if any one, who has n right to ask
the question, desires to know the name of our
correspondent, such knowledge will be mt his
disposal.
We were asked by our contemporary to copy
reply to a communication TINT had appeared in
our columns; this we declined to 10, because we
knew our correspondents and knew them to be
responsible men; both old merchants of this
city, very well acquainted with the subject
upon which they were animadvcrtng. No an
swer TO their structures was addressed to us.
An answer, however, appeared in the columns
Of another paper. We had no reason whatever
to believe that this paper was better informed
on the subject than were our correspondents.
Moreover, we cannot bind ourselves 10 read
what is printed in other papers published in
this city, for the mere purpose of ascertaining
whether they contain anything TO be copied
into THE NEWS We nrc not aware OF any pa
pers observing such rule.
The NEWS, therefore WAS nor dTare "that o
proper explanation had been given" The
position of the News is not correctly stated
We have no means Of knowing who "knows tho
truth" We told by our angry coiempornry
that we, did .."not net ingenuousy in the mat
ter." We do BOT concedc the point As re-
CARDS the prudence" Of our course in s'pub-
fishing such letters as that of a. Is. Co., our
contemporary may put itself at ease, and allow
us TO Take cnrc Of ourselves. OF course we up
preciatc such anxiety on our behalf, and arc
profoundly grateful for this delicate hint at our
want of prudence, being fully conscious of nev.r
having merited il by any similar service to our
vell-wiShng cotemporary, however often there
may have heen occasions for doing so
- At the conclusion of the very angry lecture,
to which this article refers, our cotemporary
says: "a. D. C. is not moro to blame than the
paper which gives publicity TO ;his statements,
and which appears to have deliberately adopt
ed tho policy of making or publishing unsub-
stnntinted er.parte statements, and of permit
ting no refutation of them. This policy might
possibly succeed elsewhere, but il will not sue
coed in Charleston" Our policy appears to be
strangely misunderstood. Our correspondent
needs no defense nt our hands, being fully abo 10
fight his own batlles which, therefore, we
shall permit him to do, 30 soon as he returns,
provided he sees ft 10 continue his structures
upsn tho Railroad, or to notice any quasi
replies, given by self.appointed !applogists.
In regard to what will or "wlll not succeed
in Charleston we must do our cotemporary
the justice to acknowledge that his dictum
has tho true er eathedra ring. Listen "It will
not succeed in Charleston !" Lpse dir. Sir
Oracle has spoken. Whence comes his inspira-
tidn u Who constituted our cotemporary the
prophetic censor of Charlestoni