Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1886-07-10
A CARD.

My attention has been called to q letter from
Rev. o. S. Bartcn, Of Norfolk, to Rev. J. Ct. Ann
strong, of Atlanta, published accidentally" in
volume entitled "Oilicia Ecc0rl of the A rmstrong
Trial," and circulated through the United States
of course among many people who will never
sec this antidotc. In it DIR. Barton represents me
as "the principal enemy Of DR.. Armstrong in Nor
folk and then proceeds to assai me with cpithets
and other pressions-coarse, il-naturcd and
reckless.
statement of facts When read the public an.
nouncemcnt in 1856 that REV. DR.. Armstrong
was discovered in III OWL house in CINCINNATI
remarked, doubtless hc was under the influence
Of alcohol; saw him in that condition three
years ago, at my house, during the session of the
Episcopal Council in Norfolk"
No accusation was ut any time place founded
on that observation nor upon information de-
rived from or through mo directly or remotely.
was not ono of TIC witnesses, Am not acquainted
with member Of the court, and had no earthly
connection with the trial. But members of the
vestry Of st. Lukcs church, Norfolk. did testify
in tho case that Dr. A. was under the influence
of alcohol while officiating there in tho presence
of three clergymcn, on Sunday of the session of
the same Council, and DR.. Barten knew that such
testimony was to be given.
1t is not a fact that was ever an enemy" of
DR.. Armstrong. lie was new acquaintance
met him at the Council; VIC havo been together
once since, and under very pleasant circumstances.
am still disposed to crtenHdc the charge against
this gifted and attractive man; would not will
ingly or carcessly confonnd inlrmity with crime.
The language, tone and temper of DR.. Bartcn's
letter are Of a character to arouse Indignation
but prefer to subdue the impulse to become Az.
gressivc-I stand upon my own defence. -.
This line of action is satisfactory to me for sew
eral reasons. One Of them is obvious; DR.. Barton
is teacher Of Christian ethics, and has read
tain celebrated passages in the Holy Scriptures,
which carry clear conviction to all fair and dis
passionate minds, that tho mission of tho worlds
divine Prophet, Priest and King" wa, not UNDER
taken for the purpose of insulting his "miscrablr
Jcllop' men-thc sinners or tho saints. In time
DR.. Barton will study those texts, and then un-
dcrstand their deep moaning well.
Absolutely apart from that consideration, dare
not, if would, disregard the admonitons of the
unwritten law-made and administered in every
wcll-brcd community by its sclfrcspccting mem
bers-in the interest OF the pcscc and dignity Of
society. My own observation Of the ultimate an
alysis of all reahitoy controversy, especially in
the columns Of tho press leads me to be ievc that
it is repulsve rs well rs mischievous and for the
following reasons: When angry individuals.
blinded by cgOtism, and loaded with railing ac-
cusatons, thrust upon the public tho wcarisome
details OF their own grievances, they may, ccure
certain contemptuous compassion for cxhibi.
lions OF overwrought sensibiity but they gener-
ally realize something less than COMMISSIONERS
contempt for manifestations of maleyolence-
since malice is in every feature low and mean and
ITO be hated, needs but to be seenr'
1850 CHARLES SHARP.
NORFOLK, July 1, 1856.