The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1867-03-16
T II e PRESS
Saturday Morning, March rs, 1857.

Saturday Morning, March Ii, 1857.
THE ECHO devotes more than two columns
to the Press, but after looking it through with
some care we find but little calling for extended
remark. Ofcourse it persists in misrepresen-
tation of the action of this paper, as the follow
ing samIA shows:
Why quote from those papers which ALWAYS
have been bitterly opposed TO prohibition, and
commend their opinion as of great weight, ana
worthy Of careful consideration. For instance
1T quotes from the Boston Transcript as iu :i,,
by. III 'p''aH'' ''''A HUM
We have regarded and still regard 'no Oo'
ton Transcript as one of the faires' 60
high-minded papers on our e1chanSe nov WI
out stopping to inquire whe'n'.
an advocate of prohibition or not lhoeed we
800 1r,o,, its antecedents in this regard, nor
do ,,a fael DISPOSED to engage IN investigating
tha,, But when it is said that we quoted the
y,onscript "as authority for temperance men to
6orp, their opinion BY" we deny "the soft inl-
neachment." We would no more quote it for
such purpose than we would the Echo or any
other paper. A man who pins his Temperance
opinions" to the sleeve of any paper is but a
poor stick after all to build the temple of total
abstinence. His opinion must take hold of
something more substantial than this We
quoted the Transcript as a fair, candid and re-
sponsibe paper, not as standard for other
men to conform their opinions to, but on
question of fact no less a fact than the repu-
taton of men who had been summoned before
legislative tribunal to testify in relation to a
matter affecting the public veal, and for no
other purpose. M 'Ft
The Echo, by way ola slur, speaks of the
Press as "a protested temperance paper" and
then labors to convict it of Inconsistency in
quoting as a friend of temperance such man
as Rev. Dr. Adams In the first place the Press
never pro Jessed to be a temperance paper. 1t
is political paper, and SO far as the temper
lance cause is concerned "professes" only to treat
it with all fairness, and to throw its influence
on the side of sobriety and good order. Beyond
this we deny the right of the Echo to call it to
account In the next place, we must confess
to a feeling of queerness in being upbrided for
quoting simply as "a friend of temperance" a
distinguished Doctor of Divinity in the goodly
city of Boston. We did not suppose the cbrsi-
tian church of to-day, especially the Congrega-
tional orthodox branch of it in Boston, held
within its regular communion and fellowship
d. DIS. who are not friends of temperance, nor
do aoe noao. We believe man mag be good
man and friend of temperance, and still oppose
the policy of prohibition; and to show this ex-
actly, and nothing more, we quoted two Doc
tors of Divinity, viz: Messrs. Adams and Blag-
den But we may have labored under mis-
take; on this point we are willing for others to
decide. r s.. f ... .
One other paragraph from the Echo is all
that we need quote, at this time; all that we
feel called upon to notice: SO s' |i
If the Press would not be understood as IA
voring license, why does it SO carefully collect,
publish and apparently commend every opin-
ion given against prohibition, without giving
facts and opinions in its favor, unless specially
requested to? t aH f iiail
1t seems very singular to our friends that we
did not give both sides when the testimony ON
one side only was put into the case. In all
such cases the testimony on one side is made
up and completed before the other side is given
at all. The bearing of the friends of prohibit
bition has only just commenced. For the pur-
pose We avowed in the start we are not called
upon in fairness to give the other side at all,
and yet we have from the first intended to do
it. We gave the testimony against prohibit
ton, as we have stated, not to make out case,
but only to show how good men differed, and
that reaction more or less extensive had TAX
en- place in the public mind. This fact has
been sustained by the testimony already Civ
en-, and it could be only from gratuitous dis
position to find fault that any one would in
view of all the facts, pen such paragraph as
the last above quoted from the Echo
Our neighbor winds up his notice of this pa
Per by putting the question, in a sort of con-
fessorial tone, "But how will the Press vote?"
And 1t then ro-.sss-.- ssHNa submit that If is
but fair that its readers should hness WHARF the
Press stands upon this question, and whether
the facts and opinions selected as information
in regard to the law, are clipped by an honest
friend or a secret foe of Prohibition?" 'Hs' 81
The above is decorous, gentlemanly and
courteous, of course, and the writer no doubt
feels that such @style" entities him to walk
into the secret recesses of our being and to
know and to sit in judgment on our proposed
action. We, however, differ from him, and
simply suggest that, as it is our privilege to do
so, we shall vote precisely as oar Judgment
dictates, or not at all if we prefer to do So
Ourvote cannot settle a principle, and may be
of very little worth, still, as we live in free
country we regard IL as our o,on, and we shall
dispose of it as we think best; if to the salts
faction of our confessor of the Echo WELL if
not, we can't help it. 10 .asl
And now in taking leave of our friends of the
Echo-for we do not wish to refer to this mat
ter again-we viii simply say that if they
think the cause of temperance will be promot-
ed by their coercive and denunciatory course
toward other papers, let Them pursue it; we
have no faith in any such good results, and we
happen to know that some of the Oldest, truest
and longest-tried friends of temperance in this
city regard their course precselyas we do. So,
gentlemen, to borrow your own language, hav-
ing paid your money you can take your choice
of peace or war, with the war all on your SIDE