The aegis & intelligencer. [volume] (Bel Air, Md.) 1864-1923, 1873-07-04
The article in the Hartford Democrat o

anything to do with the conduct of the paper
in any shape. During his recent trip friend,
from personal motives of friendship to him
alone, undertook to conduct THE LEgiS in his
absence. This is undoubtedly so; but our
contemporary, it appears to us, NEEDLES in
the private affairs of this journal with an I'M
warranted assumption of knowledge, and
concerns himself-in our opinion very I'M
necessarily-in regard to the authorship of
its editorial matter.
His assertion that the "avowed EDITOR as
he terms him, is not the real editor, is now
become q stale charge. 1t is but a rc-hash of
some ofthatpaper's former utterances whilstit
was under ADLER management than it now is,
and lacks even the poor merit of originality to
add any point there might otherwise be in
the assertion.
We cannot understand how the article in
THE -Bgis which prompted our neighbours
remarks was construed by him into wish
upon our part to revive Certain issues in the
party arising out of jealousies between rival
candidates for party honors in past conflicts"
: except it may be, as he himself admits, that
TIE did not comprehend the article upon
which he undertook to comment or upon
another more probable theory, that "none so
blind as they who refuse to Sec" The article
in question had no allusion to anything of
the past contest to which he evidently refers
was based upon comments concerning the
present policy of the party altogether, and
los, 4@1 p
derstood by any one who would bring to its
perusa the slightest candid attention.
We reiterate that we are anxious TO I'M
press upon the citizens and voters of this
county the fact that the contests of the past
within the lines of the Democratic party
should emphatically be ignored and cast out
of sight. The man who endeavors to revive
the recollections of any such, wewill venture
to tell our neghbor, is not, in our opinion
actuated by former political disappoint-
ments" as he phrases it, so much as he is by
ulterior motives of present OF prospective
hopes of benefit thereby. We have no SYM
pathy with any who attempt this sort ofthing;
and we assert that the very unnecessary and
at this time, is just such an attempt TO again
arouse q feeling in the Democratic party,
that that paper was in no small degree re-
sponsible for in the first instance. We trust
our language here, at least, is plain enough
to be understood.
This journal is reflected upon for its course
in the Greeley campaign. A word right here.
We did not advocate the nomination of Mr.
Greeley and expressed our preference for the
selection of Il straight out Democrats but we
supported him because he was selected by
the Democratic convention. Even by them
he was not put before the people as a Demo-
crat, but in pursuance ola policy at that time
thought by many TO be wise. We did not
agree in this opinion with the majority ofthat
convention, but acquiesccd, as we thought it
our duty to do. That campaign is over, and
it resulted disastrously to the party
Although we rendered our support to Mr..
Greeley rs stated, and for the reasons named,
we could even then so far respect the opn-
ions of members of the party who refused
him their support, as to abstain from any po-
litical quarrel with them, then or now, ON
that account
We accorded them sincerity in their opin-
ions, and knew them to be valuable members
of the party, whose consistent action as Dem
ocrats in the past gave assurance of their al
legiance to that party in the future. We had
not the inclination to ostracizc them for not
supporting Greeley. We had no heart for
that sort of work, and we did not attempt il
Our neighbor, on the contrary, undertook to
read out of the party all those Democrats
who with more foresight than himself refus-
ed TO swim with current that could only to
lead TO disaster. We did not, perhaps, sup
port Mr.. Greeley with as much pleasure as
did our neighbor, but merely from n sense of
duty. Our course, in the matter is fully JUS
titled by the result, and we are perfectly will
ling to accept any odium, if any there be- on
that account.
We cannot understand why our contempt
rary has suddenly become so strenuous an adj
vocatc Of the doctrine of rotation in office.
He was, hut short time ago, if he will re-
member, a practical transgressor of the very
theory lie now contends for when he offered
himself as n candidate for an Office he had al
ready filed for the four years Immediately
preceding He was outstrippcd it is true, by
cacil one Of his three competitors for the po-
sition, one of whom was of but two years.
standing in the profession but We do not re-
member that the rotation doctrine entered at
all into the canvass. Is he consistent to be so
intolerant of any allusion to the subject now?
Or is that the reason of his apparent dread Of
any reference to the campaign in which he too
came out disappointed political aspirant"
Or DO we put an injustice upon him in the
matter, and is il possible that he has suffered
some one, whose interest il may at this time
more nearly concern, and who may be anX-
ious to rotate" to take up the cudgels in adj
vocacy of the subject through his editorial
columns, at the same time that he puts forth
the insinuation adverted to above against
ourselves, for the purpose of more cflcctually
masking his design? Selfinterest is as goods
sign as "car-marks" TO show the paternity of
n newspaper article.
A few words more and we are done. The
policy of the Democrat appears to be to cheap
en- the wares of its neighbors, that thereby
the value Of It's own may be enhanced. To-
ward ourselves this has been its persistent