Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1871-09-08
WE SHOULD pass by unDoticed the col

respondenoe published in the Raleigh
Sentinel, between the Editor and A. Q.
Murdoch, Eco, of HilIsboro. did not Mr..
TURNER arraigu the JOURNAL for publish
ing ISLANDER in permitting Msjor HEARNE'
over his own name, place in It's columns
to explain his position in regard 10 the
late campaign in this State. We SHOULD
not care for the injustice done us In the
CORE spondence and the editorial lntroduc-
tory in creating the impression that the
JOURNAL was attempting to divide the
Wings and Democrats, and that we were
among those Democrats who bad thrown
down the gauntlet" at the feet of bis cor
respondent and other old Wings Of the
State. Our course is too we'll known for
us 10 fear that such misrepresentation
would POSSIBLY do us the i asst injury. No
| paper in the State has lebored more faith
| fully and successfully to blot out old party
| distinctions and prejudjces than the
JOURNAL, and we venture the opinion that
among no other class of persons in North
Carolina are these old distinctions more
thoroughly blotted out and forgotten than
among the friends and patrons of the
JOURNAL. We do not think there is one
old Wing in this entire section of the
State, although he may be as immovable
in his whiggery rs the Sentinel represents
Mr.. Murdoch to be, who will find fault
with the JOURNAL in regard to its course
towards those who were formerly Wings.
! From the day we began a personal can
vass of Edgecombe and Wilson counties
in favor of the election of Governor WORTH
of August last when we ended our labors
on the stump and in the saactuns for
Colonel CowAN, we have been actively
working for The political advancement OF
gentlemen who were formerly old Wings.
Nor do We intend to cease in we'll doing.
We shall not in the future inquire into, or
care for, the past political creed Of our
party nominees. We shall only demand
competent and honest men. But our recent
articles upon this very subject, and our
late defence of the admins ration of ex-
Governor WORTH against the charges pre-
ferredby General CLINGMAN, charges, too,
made in no spirit of unfriendliness.-are
too fresh in the minds of our readers to
require repetition of our views upon
these matters.
SO far as Mr.. TURNER is concerned per-
sonally, we intended no discourtesy in
pub; ishing the letter of Major HEARNE. II
there was any seeming discourtesy to him
because he was an editor, the discourtesy
to Major HEARNE in refusing to publish q
card with his name signed thereto would
have been greater, be also being an edi-
tor, and at the time without paper of his
own-the more so as we had few weeks
previously refused to publish a similar
article without his name, even though
there would be no doubt as to its pater-
nifty. Although the JOURNAL and Mr..
HEARNE differed on the Convention Ques-
ton, it did not deprive him of the cour-
tesy due him as an editor. We fear the
mistake Mr.. TURNER makes is that he
either regards himself as the only editor
IN the State, or that he occupies suoh a
position in the party or in North Carolina
that the JOURNAL is precluded from pub
fishing cards over their own signatures from
responsible gentlemen and editors when
their views or feelings do not coincide with
his. The JOURNAL does not approve or advo
cate prescription certainly it does not
q party Convention to prescribe what is
orthodox and what heterodox. Major
HEARNE is a gentleman and responsible
for what he publishes, and as an act Of
editorial courtesy the JOURNAL could do
no less than publish the letter for Mr..
HEARNE, although he did not agree with
the Sentinel or the JOURNAL on the Conven-
ton question. We do not recognize MIR.
TURNER'S right to prescribe Major HEARNE
any more than we recognize Ma or
HEARNE's right to prescribe Mr.. TURNER.
The JOURNAL is arraigned for publish
ing q SANDER" Whether it be SANDER or
not the JOURNAL does not know. MAJ or
lHEARNE, an editor and a responsible gen
tleman, asserts that Mr.. TURNER belonged
to the Ku-Klux. Mr.. TURNER, also au
editor and responsible gentleman, denies
the statement. The JOURNAL cannot I'M
dertake to decide what is purely a ques-
ton of veracity between two gentlemen
In the columns of the JOURNAL Mr..
TURNER and Major HEARNE occupy equal
ground. The JOURNAL may think Major
HEARNE more prudent and discreet as
an editor than Mr.. TURNER, or it
may not. But this is a question not
meet for discussion. Both gentlemen, ac
cording to the Code Editorial, have a
right to expect certain courtesies from the
JOURNAL. and they shall receive them,
share and share alike. so long as we con-
duct this paper. Because Mr.. TURNER and
Major HEARNE do not agree in opinion !;
because the Sentinel aud the Telegram were
at variance, is not sufficient reason 10 ex
clude Major HEARNE from the columns of
the JOURNAL when he has no paper of his
own.
The Sentinel, like the rest Of rs, needs
to learn the lesson of charity and tolerance.
We ell need to have the mantle of charity