Frostburg mining journal. [volume] (Frostburg, Md.) 1871-1913, 1897-12-18
EDITORIAII.
Once More.

falrchlldren, affects to think the JOURN-
AL has missed entirely the points of
his crit icism-a pretenSe easier to eX-
hiblt than establish.
There were not so many points but
that they can be briefly enumerated :
l. The legitimacy of the use of the
term, "heavcn,' in the singular num-
Der as "a builder of ''frowning breast
works.
,, The practicabilty of Il spectator
looking one direction and seeing the
spectacle that is behind Us we'll as the
one before him.
These are positively all that were
raised by the JOURNAL in its first
article
Fair Play introduced the subjects
Of capitalization and Synonymy of
"heaven with God" both matters of
propriely rather than of rule. He was
50 desperately pressed into debate of
these ineXact matters that he also
raised
L, The question of ptrsonifying the
moon. and, worse
.. Whined about the JOURNAL 'SrjgM
to per>ouity when that right was never
involved.
Now, then, the case stands just this
way, and he will not be permitted to
squlrni ont Of it:
His last article is proof that he was
torccd to abandon The only two real
points in the controversy first
namrd herein. He says the JOURNAL
missed them''-hs way of stating. in
fact, that while the JOURNAL was
sticking to them he was. with manifest
pn1pose, diveriing the debate to COM
pai ativeiy immaterial matters.
In the attention the JOURNAL gave
to capitalization it did use a collection
of quotations. one by J. H. HoAt and
Anna l.. Ward, undeniablya "a very com
tetent pair, They call their work
The Cyclopmdia of P1uctiml Quota
tions." and state that leach authors
peculiarites have been respected" and
it is more than likely that where
changes We're made it was to the ad-
vantage of the text.
If the reader, however, thinks Fair
Play" a better Judge of the use of cap
itals than compilers whose business it
is to copy Alright, the JOURNAL cannot
coincide.
When "heaven' is used to represent
the beatitic state there is no doubt it
should be capitalized. That idea
ought TO be in the minds of the author,
copyist and printer.
When used. however, in any other
sense-tor instance, ''ln throwing up
frowning breastworks," then it ought
not TO be so distinguished, no matter
who says to the contrary.
Hence, Fairchild's figure WAS bias
phemous.
And Fair Play's' prompt, gratui-
tous, accurate divination of his clients
meaning, and equally accommodating
endorsement Of it, were worse than
blasphemous.
la this connection it Is not a little
curious to note that the Standard
Dictionary, an authority with "Falr
Play when the word. "christian," is
involved, does not capitalize heaven"
as it does "christian.'
And this induces the JOURNAL to
ask-if the word, "chrstian," derived
from II Name that is above every
name, should be always on that ac-
count capitalized, how does "Fair
Play get rid of the capital when he
writes the antonym, ''unchrislian ~
If he says this use divests the derva-
tive of its sacred import, will he then
tell us why IA similar change does not
take place when his dictionary dis
plays the compound, "un-A merican -
L lit cot hNAlI CduuON let lulS OcCd-
sion pass without noting choice speci
men of this intellectual acrobat's logic.
He writes:
he (joURNAD has occasion to say that by
reason of a reference of Fair Play to his
| spelling of the word. heaven, as it was done
in his criticism, Fair Play has detained
the literary character Of nearly every author
mentioned i'll the lists given by the JouRNAL.
To which we merely reply that, If he will
take the trouble to read Fair Plays" words
again, Mr. Oder will be obliged to revise his
| statement of the matter to make it accord
| with truth. What Fair Play wrote was
| this: The JorEN>Ls spelling of the word,
heaven j" this instance is like the man him.
| self--done on a small scale" No reference
| to any other author, nor to the JOURNALS
| spelling of the word at any other time.
Let us see about this:
Did Fair Play" ever say
II is an accepted ca~on IF literary criticism,
that Heaven capitalized is a synonym for
God?
If he did, how can he affirm now
that he had
No reference to dny other author?