Lexington weekly intelligencer. (Lexington, Mo.) 1871-1887, 1885-09-26
to Judge a book altogether by the ''kiver."


We recognize the great value to Lexington
of its schools. We have preached Volumes
from that text. But, if they send abroad Tor
everything they must bug, of what good will
they be in u business point of view? To say,
because a grocery house here can not 'vle'
with David Nicholson's, that therefore it Is
unworthy to be patronized; because the
Royle dry good, house is no. equal to Bars,
we should send off for our goods in that line;
because Mr.. RobinsOn's mill cannot pretend TO
compare with Gov. Star in st. Louis that
Prof. Lanneau should buy his flour in Kansas
City; or because Msssrs. Grimes & Venable
have not such an establishment as Tiffany's
that he should send to the latter for his gold
medals, Is a doctrine which if carried to its
legitimate result would bankrupt the business
men OF the town.
If Prof. Lanneau had had his catalogue
printed in Lexington more than half of his
money would have gone to the mechanics
who did the work. They in turn would
have spent it with our merchants. In some
cases it would have changed hands three or
four times before 1t left town, leaving a profit
and a benefit for each transaction. As it is,
it went directly away from home to help
build up another town. Our profit in 1t
would not have been very gre at, say six or
eight dollars. We could easily have kept
still, and made more money out OF Prof. Ian
| neau thereby, but we have felt hurt at this
| yearly advertisement being sent out that We
| were not competent tn print q pamphlet. We
have a pigeon hole full vi them before us,
-.;uto1 T., O. ouiS E.n..- H,f, onI nthor
| places, and none OF them are bet ter than we
| can prepare. We do not care a fig for the
profit on the catalogue. but there is q princi-
| pie underlying this whole thing that had AS
we'll BIZ discussed one time rs another. Ii to
discuss 1t the president OF a school must be
criticised. what OF that! We have the
temerity to ~criticise even the president
of the United States. Singular as it may
seem to President Lanneau we see nothing in
our utterances for which we should either
feel ashamed or apologize, and we continue
to think that he ought to be ashamed of send
ing printing to Kansas City.
-
As to the professors last paragraph we have
this to say: 1t was our intention to treat all
the schools in a friendly manner. and even
though we did feel hurt in some directions, tc
at least print of them what the public would
look for as news. With this view, on the
Wednesday of opening week, we addressed &
note to each of the presidents of the schools
asking for items in regard to the bOarder'
and teachers arriving, aud stating that fur
Their news items could be used as late as
Friday. So far as we remember, the note
were couched in nearly the same language
Prot. Lsnneau was the only one of the pres
idents who did not have the politeness t.
deign to notice our communication. Until hi
r explains his action regarding it, or apologize
for neglecting to acknowle ledge q courtesy
, even if extended by a gentleman with whom
I at the time he felt displeased, our self respec
will cause us to decline even to disclose t.
+, Our Office cat what we shall say in the futur
regarding the subject at hand. Our feeling
toward the Baptist Female College are not
: all involved in the matter. The question
+ one full of Interest, covering the range G
: proper reciprocity in business affairs, i
s which Lexington is more concerned tina
many people think, and our columns al
open to Prof. Lanneau for a continuation
: our pleasant symposium upon it.