The Democrat. (Scotland Neck, Halifax Co., N.C.) 1884-1896, 1885-10-15
ANSWERS.

LII Is IHueeu SlIduBc W us, lHtt ~
seems now questions can rarely be
discussed by two papers. Whys
Because one of them which cannot
stand opposition soon leaves it's ar
gumezt and talks Of other things,
insinuates, flies tho track and bursts
in general. why cannot questions
lee argueds Why are not editorials
answered. We will set this forth IS
a good rule to follow: if an editorial
has reasons in it, answer them, if it
has not, why notice it at all!
Below we give the first part OF an
editorial in the Register on "Tariff
Taxation" You will note that we
are spoken of as Initiating that
that our contemporary fayors pro-
tectlve Tariff and is not a good
Democrat. We said, "Our esteemed
contemporary, the Register, has
fallen into the same error that all
the new converts to the protective
Tariff system invariably fall in, I'M
less they have studied the subject
closely"
The fact is, we made no intima-
ton whatever; we only offered legal
criticism, upon an editorial; we
showed that the defense by the
Register Of our tax upon fertilizers
is the same as that offered by pro-
tective tariff men in substantiation
Of their theory; and by the reason
ing of revenue tariff men we showed
that such defense is weak. We arc
opposed to our fertilizer tax upon the
same principles that we oppose pro-
tective tariff
Does our friend mean to say that
ali who oppose any of his ideas init
mate that he is not a Democrat
1t must be that and only that be.
fore he can say that We intimated
thrt he is not a Democrat.
In the clipping below, perhaps
you will notice 4oving(g) tribute
to our stare press, when the neois;e,
compares the fun Of the Detroit F. et
I'r's$ with ''leatling editorials"
Wemust acknowledge the toresi chi
OF our friend in giving a clipping
from tho FIRE Press so that the
piece would be readable, even if 1T
did have TO invent the causes tina.
drew it forth, for not having ADJUST
occasion to bring in this fun he sci
his imagination at task and sool
discovered 81 that we had give1
him "charge lnsinuated and It,
tEe) charge direct" --e-r. -
Little did we think when we gay,
honrabie opposition to cur city ex-
c:'rnse That such p pie,e 81 the n.,.
below would emanatc from it in re
ply. We must confess chat we cx-
iios'.2d the facts and reason in =.
gard 10 The fertilizer tx, Had =,
i,nGii a pr,,ilEet, VIC would h:,yc, nesc.
calt'#l our contcmi .orary's nrrn
si;:ce w. have baen tausl.. that i
htuoks I'D opposition, Init we woul:
hae just as. earnestly. oppnse
and perhaps i'll stronger Language
the agricultural department. 49,
We ,leein it the duty. Of Al editor
to give his -o,ca opin;oas and &
substantiate these with arguments
to listen to opposition, 10 remov
opposition BY reason, to be rot atou
criticism which is just, andso be tru
to his own ideas regardless Of whom Ii
30 doing he opposes. Had we know
that We were proving oursclf to b
fit subject for lunatic asylum b
opposing city editor and one who i
perhaps the leader Of our State pres
and who has life Of journalism t
warranty the reply which we rccei,
Ell, had we thought it to be aiscour
teous fer q young paper to boldly st
tack an argument Of an old one, an
had we suspected that our argument
would te ignored, and Instead of a,
answer to them that we would re
ceive reply. filed with humorou
extracts from Detroit paper, whic
we would not have expected fro
tyro western journalist, then pc,
haps we would consider that we he
outraged a contemporary by n,
blindly accepting it's opinion Us We
founded and its position as impree
nable.
We have not lived fifty years We
nor long enough as an editor y,
to learn all the details Of the etiquet
of journalism, but until we deem
indecent we shall continue to dis
gree with city editors when we 81
fit. President Cleveland has set
bad example for those editors wi
arc 6;cnoSa6 IN follOU hi,, s;noo !,