The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1882-03-11
For TIE Seatiae
Questionable Journalism,

Considerable anxiety during the past week
was exhibited by the Regular and Irregular
Democracy of the county generally, and q
Iris district particularly, as TO the probable
outcome of the Governors preferences for
our local Judiciary. Various were the ramors
and still more various the opinions OF the m
siders. as well as the outsiders OF the kang.
The Baltimore dailies of Friday, however, re-
moved all doubt, the papers OF that date an
nouncing all the appointments y are nov
informed that the paper with which the sen
ator from this county, Is the admitted intel
lecfual head. was IN possession Of the intor-
nation 10 early a. Wednesday, but held i Tor
IL Friday issue The natural presumption -
that the position 10 which the people OF tilis
county elected the said Senator, Is being used
IL him for the purpose Of advancing the en-
terrrise az a private establishment IN the sue
cess Of which he has at least sympathetic
interest.
The anticipation by the city dailies Of this
feat Of questionable journalism may, OF may
not induce respectable reflection on the part
~ The Senior Editor Of the .adroesfe. as 10
what really constitutes the duties Of the prin-
eiTal representative from oar county in The
lerislatsre this however seems to be the ap.
pearance, that the cash derived from the IN
creased sales Of paper containing lnforma-
ION not to Be found anywhere elses was ex-
pected 10 be an efFset in part for il loss on
future printing Of the Laws.
The only circumstance that caused mis-
carriage oi this grand journalistic enterprise,
was the .Adrocate's being published once a
week. and that rather late. As i was, spec
nlation and nervousness were lssinlged Tor
three unnecessary days, all Of which might
have been avoided BY an exercise q . eonsid'
crate humanity
The above article appeared in the SeafiHei
Of March the 4th. Il was % false and often
sive that the following note was sent 70 the
nablisher. demanding the name Of the author
WESTMINSTER, Mn, March 4, 1852.
On. ". Fl. RrrPARp The article ~QHes-
fionaisle journalism in the Seistsnst ct this
date, il both false and offensive, and we de-
mand the name Of the author.
Respectfully SASnEEfaEh bhes.
Or. Rippard replied by verbal message that
he would answer, but no answer being re-
eeiyesl up to half past ) O'Clock in the eve
ming. the following note was sent 70 him:
WEsrAIxsrEs, Mn, March 4, 1882.
DIR. W. II. REPPARD "a Although some i've
hours has elapsed since we requested the name
of The author If the article entitled '-Ques-
T2NHAHfe 09ufffaAletN@ ft0 AEAtAf mas bNNAt
cpived. a. promised. We don't want the
matter carried over 10 next week and want
the name The author, no doubt, lives in
town, and having INDUCED in offensive lan-
puaee he should not be permitted TO screen
himself. and You have no right 70 withhold has
name unless you assume the responsibility
Respectfully, NaSpERFoRn Bios
The following reply came back:
wEsrMlSsrRR. Mn, March 4, lss2.
MRssRs. KAxDFRFeRD Bios,
GExTLENEx Your re-
aaast rather surprises me rs you do not your
selves make Il i practice to divulge the authors
Of articles that appear in the ADVOCATE. !
refer particularly to the article in regard 70
our late candidate for sheriff published pre-
vions 10 last election. | have been too busy
today to call en- the person who wrote the
article in question and until ] consult the
party prefer not TO give an answer.
Yours Respectfully, w. II. RIPrARn.
No reply being received up to noon Mon
dav. further demand was made, as follows
WESTMINSTER, Mn, March 9, 1882.
Da. w. II. RlFpARD lin reply to yonl
note Of Saturday, We would say that Mr.. ClarA
was told that we we're responsible tor the artl
Gle, but refused to tell him where we obtained
the information besides, the article IN refer
ence to him did not reflect upon his private
character There must be some responsible
person to answer for the article IN your paper
On Questionable Journalism. Whether yor
choose to make yourself responsible or TO di
vnlge the name Of the author, is s matter yor
must decide for yourself We insist upon m
immediate answer, and no further time vii
be allowed. In conducting the ADVOCATE We
have always avoided personally offensive art
cles, except on several occasions, when insult
was intended. You have allowed offensive
personal articles to appear in your paper con
corning the editors Of this paper and theii
father for some years past, and you have glyer
acknowledgements TO them by giving then
prominent positions and leading them. Oul
desire to avoid difficulties has prompted US t.
pass some Of these by, but this last article, OF
ssQuestionable Journalism, requires atten
ton, and we want the name Of the author a
once, unless YOU choose to assume the respon
sibility. Respectfully,
VAyDERFoRD BRos.
The bearer Of the above note brought back
the following reply;
WESTMINSTER, Mn, March 6, 1882.
MEssRs. NaSDERF0RD BRos.,
GENTLEMEN, ! do no
assume the responsibility for the article il
question, as | personally do not endorse it
but my own seffrespeet forbids me giving yoI
the name Of the author. Yours, respectfully
w. H. RIPPARD.
The editor Of the Sentinel thus escapes b,
absoIving himself from any responsibility
and disclainling any endorsement of the arti
Gle the miserable wretch who wrote it find
security in a mistaken idea Of journalism OF
the part Of the editor, and we shall make nj
comment, but say to the author
That the article is false from beginning tt
end
ThGt he kRer il was .false when he wrote it
That no gentleman, or one pretending &
respectaJility, would indulge in falsehood am
49,. s.,s;r.,,.t;lr, aud llnllne resnnnsihilifv