Litchfield enquirer., 1876-07-06
Our .Dscsaration."

WhGl a Christian deDOunceS sectS ana pruclninn himself member of the Church UuEvsrsAl. ke becomes an object of suspi- es0a to all the CongregatiOnalists. Episco- paIfzns. MekhOdists and other denomina- ssazzl Christians of his acquaintance. Jsst so the person or paper that proclaims posTsi,@l Independence loses much of the can6asnre Of that great majority of per ss1z Os papers who belong to the two great political parties. Nor is this suspi- es0a w1thO1t grave cause. Nothing IS emzser than the proclamation of political CT rsIigiOaS independence nothing is harder than its practice. Our views arc % largely the result of habit and preiu- dsoe, r@sher than of any candid examina- Eloa of facts. that an honest proclamation oE Ia1epe1dence is apt to signify only the change from . conscious to an uncon- s=sOas parsisanship.
 WheA, therefore, the Enquirer long since announced its intention of giving its eAief attention to local rather than politi- cal matters. we were careful to avoid the blazdeg of declaration of political inde- p<n1e1ce. Ne made no pretence to any saeA independence. simply because we ds1 nOt suppose it possible for us to attain ts IL For twenty years we have taken a lively interest in politics and must believe that oar pErindices are as strong as those of okhex people under like influences. All that we have attempted to do, is to avoid eO1scfo foas partisanship; to treat political matters frum the independent and not fro@ the partisan standpoint.
 We oaght not therefore, to complain if car coarse has laid us open to some mis- eoa4kr1ction- It is so much the way of partisan ioarnAls tO treat all political mat serz ns counsel on trial of e case treat the evidence. that any attempt at more inde- pendrat or liberal dealing is misunder- stood Were lawyer to rise in court and san ap his facts with the same scrupu- lOaS fairness as is expected of judge, he wOaA very possibly do senous injury to his elssak All his suspicion of unfair dealing on his own side, would be accept ed as conclusive evidence against him, while equally well-grOunded suspicious of his opponents would be allowed no weight An editor attempting candor in political dealing Is even more liable to misunder- standing, because the evidence with which he deals Is so much more complex, lncon- elusive and difficult of just compreaen- ssoa. Nevertheless the advantage of plain speakfng is so great. that we shall not abanaOe the practice-happily a growing one among iOarnaliFts-even at the risk of occasional misapprehension.
 All we insist upon is that our reader: should not forget that, though the Enqui Ter IS edited by Republican, it is mol edited as . Republican paper. We make no broad claim of judicial fairness; Vt only insist on our right to treat politics mol as lawyers treat evidence at the bar bat aa i9Eymen discass it in the frank in RerrAAnna s>f oPsns0ns that should precedt . verdict Our suspicious and dislikes O Republican politicians and measures may not be 90 many and serious as our suspi cions and dislikes of Democratic men an( measures. but we intend. to give them jus &s frank expression; and we do not wisl them treated as the confessions" of representative Republican, editing a Re pablic&n paper.