Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1886-11-15

reprodnced in tho latter containec-'s'ss'
pecuiinrly personal references that are
seldom seen outside Of those journals
which are conducted by the jackals and
coyotes Of the profession, and never IN
those 80 loitlly prstentlous as the paper
which deems II necessary 70 so often MS
sure the public II is there TO stay"
Editor Barlow has, we are aware, made
persistent and vicious warfare on the
News; he has exhibited A spirit toward
that paper that indicated an underlying
grievance far beyond what appeared In
prints but the article printed by the
News contained personalities that should
have been excluded even from news
paper that had been uujustly treated by
Mr.. Barlow. We grant that the News
had been continually proyoked; that
Barlow at times would provoke q saints
but the News owed something to It's pre-
tensions, and for no provocatlon should
that paper have descended to the low
order OF journalism which seeks In the
privacy OF Individually for material OF
retort and retaliation. There Is
little enough Of pity and mercy
and consideration between news
papers at best, and this search into a
mans Individual lie or action should be
left, especially by such papers as the
News, to the tyros and ghouls That infect
the press. What man does as editor or
public Official, all his actions that are con-
nected with his position, even his qualih-
cations for the place he fills, may De CON
sidered legitimate texts for comment,
but the essentially private conduct Of all
individuals belong to themselves alone,
and not to the public, for they do not
affect the public. A mans ambition for
a public ONCE is public affair, albeit
not discredtable, but the vocation he
pursues II legal, and his individual
misiortunes or foibles or sins, belong
only TO himself and his God aud II is a
cowardly instinct that impels a resort
to such matters for publication And policy
II not decency, should keep papers free
OF such atrocities; for the Examiner,
Itself, is living witness to the injury q
paper does itself by personalities 10 jour
nalism. THE GAZETTE did sympathize
with the Examiner because the News out
Bartowed Barlow In its failure TO exclude
from the Kingsbury letter those peculiar
ly personal illusions TO which we refer.
1t Is true THE GAZETTE had It's grievance
against the ExamlL er for foul SANDER,
by inslnuatlon, but had chat grievance
been ten times what 1t was this paper
would not have printed anything in Bar
fowls private individual life, separated
from his connection With his paper, even
had 1t known such things were true.
There can be no Justification for such
journalism save, perhaps, Ia the esteem
of the iackas and cayotes who are ad.
dicted to II.
The News thoroughly compreh ended
THE GAzETTE's comments on this famous
suit between the two great political Jour
nalists OF Texas, but 1t endeavors TO util
lie the occasion to recall Bartow's near
insinuatlon against THE GAZETTE aud tc
attribute rivalry to this paper as mo
'i"" ,rhso'J ''afs1i 'sunndlng. 7Ss nprn Al
the Dallas branch deems It necessary 10
notify the public that II sis here to stav u
rivalry will not disturb THE GAZETTE
There Isn't much to fear in the ma n WIN
whistles to keep his courage up, or in the
paper that Is forever telling people II
nasn gone back to the gull yet, but, ais
mere 70 stay" Dallas Is fine town, and
WIN Always have paper OF some sort,
eho' as much as the egotlsm and self.
complacency Of the News may doubt II.
lhE GAZETTE is utterly Indifferent
whether 1t Is that paper or some other.