cannot bear reproof! The suggestion comes to us forcibly whilst reflecting for a moment on some ill judged criticisms that, a few days since, were given utterance to anent[a] our editorial remarks on a recent local event and which are referred to in common parlance as the "Church Article" That in these days of reading and reflection, the critic should himself be criticised is but a natural inference, and therefore it is that the publicist or the ordinary journalist expects his writings or deductions to be scanned by the scrutinising eye of the public. It is well that it should be so, it is, indeed, a legitimate and healthy state of things, and far be it from us to desire its abrogation. A public writer, notwithstanding that he may be more skilled and more thoughtful in matters pertaining to his profession than a majority of persons for whom he writes, would be more than mortal did he not sometimes err; yet, as a rule, if he possess any mental calibre above mediocre, his perpetual round of thought and a means of observation must necessarily lead him to more correct conclusions than would usually be arrived at by those whose opportunities do not lie in the same direction.
Thus much by way of introduction, and now for the "Head and front of our offending". The charge against the Gazette is that it has raked up things that it had no business with, and if its editor had not been a foolish fellow, he would have seen that his living was at stake by such conduct. Now, if we were disposed to treat the matter facetiously (as our humour might sometimes incline us to do), we should say Good gracious! how alarming! - how dreadful? But as we are just now in a more serious mood, we will simply indulge in a little expansion of our own views on the matter, in justapositon to those of our would be censor. Yet us say then, firstly, that we had neither part nor parcel in the "raking up of things" beyond the mere record of recent doings as associated with certain other events of local importance in the history of one of churches, and, secondly, that in so far as our conduct lies, we have reason to be satisfied with the comments and compliments which it has elicited from those a goodly number- whose minds are sufficiently educated, and, above all, sufficiently free to form a correct estimate of our intentions as well as of our duties. We wrote both temperately an truthfully - not to say charitably- and have not one word to retract.
If a local journal submits to the dogma that it should not comment on local occurrences, but should simply confine itself to the mere record of what commonly called news, it surrenders at once its highest prerogative and sacrifices its power for the public good, which was, or ought to have been the chief incentive to its establishment. Such a condition may be borne - because compulsory - under -
Cite error: <ref> tags exist for a group named "Notes", but no corresponding <references group="Notes"/> tag was found
