THE REPORTER.
"'TIS PLEASANT, THROUGH THE LOOP-HOLES OF RETREAT, TO PEEP AT SUCH A WORLD-- TO SEE THE STIR OF THE GREAT BABEL, AND NOT FEEL THE CROWD."
VOL. II. NO. 48	WASHINGTON, (PA.) MONDAY, APRIL 23d, 1821.	WHOLE NO. 100.

      MR. EDITOR,

            In your paper of the 19th ult Mr. Candidus has given us his 10th Number,¹ in which he has avowed some things in opposition to my preceding remarks in defence of our laws, that merit a reply. Thinking that I had fairly noticed all Mr. C's arguments which were deserving of notice, I did intend not to trouble you, or the public, with anything further. A perusal of Candidus' last number has induced me, however, once more, to take up my pen, which I would have done sooner, but that I expected Mr. C. would have followed up the argument in his last number, by some further observations. But since this seems not to be his intention, I shall proceed.

      Before noticing the argument contained in Mr. C's last number, I must express my regret, that he should have indulged in so many remarks altogether foreign from the point in dispute. What, for instance, has the fact of my "ordinary," or of his extra- ordinary talents, to do with the question? How does it concern the question, whether I live "contiguous to your office" or remote from it? Whether Mr. C's talents are "formidable" or not formidable? Whether he "considers" himself "suffering that opposition which the best of men and the best of causes have had to encounter" or, indeed what Mr. C considers himself to be, or to do, or to suffer. As he has, however, thought fit to let the public know what he thinks of himself, he must not take it amiss, if we compliment him, for once, as far as to follow him in some of his wanderings from the strait-forward path of candid discussion.

      And, in the first place, Mr. Editor, I present for your notice the following sentence: "It is by no means difficult for any man or ordinary talents, who has been a little conversant in books to join words together upon the wrong side of any question, in such a way as to appear somewhat plausible." Here we have, the grade which poor Timothy occupies on the scale of intellect, fixed and adjusted with due formality and precision, and by implication, that also which is held by the peerless Mr. Candidus himself. But as this latter point is one of some magnitude, we are not left to mere implication and inference; for he tells us plainly, as it became him, on a subject so necessary for all to know, that his character is unspotted and his "talents are supposed to be formidable, &c." There is a place in Germany (Auchtermanshohe I think they call it) in a defile between two mountains, where the rising vapours form themselves into an immense speculum, or mirror, in such a manner the astonished traveller sees a shadowy figure of gigantic size, which mimics all his motions, nods as he nods, raises its arm as he raises his, and goes through all the gesticulations that he is pleased to perform. The figure is, in fact, nothing but his own image magnified into the dimensions of a huge colossus. We cannot help thinking that Mr. C. has been at Auchtermanshohe.

      Mr. C. seems to think, that the reason why so many have written against his sentiments, or as he is pleased to say, have raised "such a hue and cry of hearsay and immorality" against him, is, that his formidable talents are dangerous "to certain interests which" he says "have come in contact with them." What may have been the motives of those who have appeared in the papers against Mr. C. we cannot tell, but we do suspect that he labours under a mistake in this matter. Some of our reasons for thinking so, we shall briefly state. 1st, Mr. C. if we remember right, himself was the first to write and publish on this subject. 2nd, When moral societies were first formed in this part of the country, it does not appear to have been with a view to molest Mr. C. nor, in all their operations down to this present time, have they evinced any such intention. 3d. It is not clear to us what interests have been in danger from the formidable talents of Mr. C. 4th, We do most solemnly assure Mr. C. that we have neither felt any trepidation on this ourselves, nor have we seen the least symptom of it in others. There is a great scarcity of money, and owing, perhaps, in part, to this cause, but still more to a laxity of public morals, crimes have become, of late unusually frequent. On these subjects there is some anxiety and alarm, but none on any subject connected with the talents of Mr. C. however formidable these may be in themselves. 5th. Our legislature, when they enacted those laws respecting vice & immorality, which Mr. C. has tho't proper to impugn, & we to defend, it is more than probable, were entirely innocent in respect of any ill-will or malice whatever against Mr. C. 6th. The most of those who have written against Mr. C. on the present controversy, are either boys or superanuated old men, who were not likely to come "in contact with" the formidable talents of Mr. Candidus.

      Though these reasons, taken singly, may not be thought perfectly conclusive on the question, yet if Mr. C. will take them all together, we think, he will see, that they go very far to shew, that, as we have stated before, he must labor under a great mistake in the matter aforesaid. And now, that we are upon this point, we must be permitted candidly to state the reasons why we did venture within the lists with our formidable antagonist. His publications appeared, week after week, and month after month, in your paper. Those who wrote in opposition, with the exception of Mr. F. injured the cause they meant to support. Their productions, in general exhibited a perfect picture of intellectual imbecility, without the faintest glimmering of sense. The consequence was, Mr. C. claimed the victory. And with apparent reason; not from his own strength, however, but from the weakness of his opponents: it was a pigmy armed with a rush, fighting with a knight in panoply. ² The result of such a contest was likely to produce unfavorable impressions. This circumstance induced us to offer a few thoughts on the subject. Besides, we were not without hopes of being serviceable to Mr. C. himself. It really would be pleasing to us, to convince this gentleman of his error. And as we had no hopes of succeeding in this design while he continued to entertain those high ideas of his talents, purity, &c. we have been at some pains to undeceive him in this particular: for Solomon tells us what hopes we are to entertain of a man "wise in his own conceit." And if we may judge from the tone of Mr. C's last number, which is considerably lower than heretofore, we really flatter ourselves, with gaving gained some degree of success in our undertaking. Such have been our views in writing him on this subject; not any malevolence towards Mr. C. Quite the reverse. Of this Mr. C. himself seems to be, in some measure, sensible. For after alleging that his opponents had been actuated by unworthy motives and had endeavored to injure his character he adds "I do not apply the preceding observations to Timothy, for so far he has been the least culpable though not altogether innocent in these respects." This is pretty clever, though not altogether so candid as we could have wished. We would respectfully suggest to Mr. C. the possibility, that his imagination may have mislead his judgment in this case. It does appear, that he has been involved in some unpleasant collisions with some person or persons, in which he has conceived himself injured. This has heated him. And, in such a state, he is, perhaps, not the best qualified to judge of the conduct of others, who have had no share whatever in the wrongs, whether real or imaginary, of which he complains. That this is the case with Timothy we do solemnly aver. We have never wronged Mr. Candidus. We would not hurt a hair of his head. We are not certain, that we know who he is. If he is the person, that he is generally supposed, we have never come "in contact" with him. We have no reason to hate or fear him. His talents however "formidable" to "certain interests" we are quite sure, are not so to ours. We believe him to entertain erroneous opinions touching our wholesome laws. These we should gladly persuade him to lay aside; and in this should we be so fortunate as to succeed, we would be doing him not harm, but good.

      But he complains that we have done him injustice in passing unnoticed what he calls his primary arguments and attacking his secondary ones. The reason of this was that his primary arguments we considered to be, indeed, no arguments at all. They are principles which, to be sure, are not sufficiently extensive, as we mean to shew in our next number, but which, so far as they go we never intended to dispute; tho' we think we have shewn them to have no logical connexion with the inferences which Mr. C. has deduced from them. Thus I have in this number noticed some of those things advanced by Mr. C. which though totally aside from the question, merited some notice. In my next, I shall confine myself to his arguments whether primary or secondary. In the mean time I would say to Mr. C and all my readers--beware of Auchtermanshohe.

[The Reporter, 23 April 1821, p. 1.]