OCR Text |
Show OTl Tff Irs- (liravo Itliinleriutr. Gentlemen engaged in tho contro-vn-"-y "on "OH Titles'' are at prfe-cl liberty to imagine who are the writers of the communications opposed to their views; but when they assume through their own enrrcspondonce to know them, tint! make personal attacks; at-tacks; or, when they do still worse . -OJid privately -altauk individuals as ' -fhe writers of letters which tliey never saw" until in. type, a grave blunder Ls committed, an ofl'ense against social amenities, and those who do so manifest man-ifest a vindictive sprit that is beneath a. gruticonan. ''-Pioneer" thought 'xJrmirts'J was a "palaeccar jumper," and so attacketl him, yet 'Tioneer" was much mistaken. "Piuto" con-.sidoriHl con-.sidoriHl that he knew the aar-marks of '-Ihie 'M'ho Knows," find blun-derrth" blun-derrth" Tinmistakably over it. "Sojourner" "So-journer" attack "One Who Knows" as if he had a personal acquaintance witlf him; and -now yec learn that btdge F; M. Smith has Iteen charged with being '"Sojourner," and an injury in-jury has been attempted to his business busi-ness as a result. Judge FT 5L Smith's name has never come up before directly di-rectly nor indirectly in the discussion, in this ollicc; nor has he ever written a communication on the subject of "Old Titles" to. the Herald; nor has he seen one ot" the late commnnica-tions commnnica-tions in the Heiulp, so far as wo know, until after they, havo appeared in type, W'c beg to fnform all concerned con-cerned that there aro:morc people interested' in-terested' Hi the discussion, and ruady to hike a art in it, than they have any idea of; and wc question very much if any one except "Piute" and ourselves our-selves has the most remote idea who "Sojourner" may be, unless whatever irttiiitrde friends, if ajiy, to whom ho may have communicated the infor: mation. It is needless to say that wck'now nil the parties, from "Junius" "Ju-nius" mid "Old Miner," to "Piute." |