Reply to the Voice of the West
By Editor
We are happy to find our late article, "Facts Which Should Be Known," which was published in Review No. 7, present volume, copied by the Voice of the West of Jan. 17, 1865. To the remarks appended in the Voice, we have but a word to say on two points: 1. It is asserted by the Voice that Eld. P. did not claim the privilege of reviewing our arguments, through the Review, but simply of correcting our "errors and misrepresentations;" and that this privilege was denied him. In reply to this we have to say, that Eld. P.'s letter is published on pp. 136 and 187 of Both Sides; and in it will be found this language: "What say, Bro. White; do you intend I shall have a fair opportunity through your columns to review my reviewer?" True Eld. P. said considerable about "errors and misrepresentations; but such language as the above calls for a review of indefinite length. As to the errors and misrepresentations, as we have already often said, we took care to guard against all complaint on this score, by giving Eld. P.'s articles entire; so that if we misstated or misrepresented him, the reader could readily detect it. 2. The Voice denies the charge of wishing to keep its readers in the dark concerning our side of the question, and in proof urges the fact that in Nov. last, Eld. H. extended through the Voice a challenge to Bro. White and Andrews to discuss with some one on his side of the question, certain points of difference between them. This challenge was called out by our remarks on the three messages in Review Vol. xxiv, No. 12, and we understood it to have reference to the messages only. We are glad to learn that Eld. H. includes the Sabbath also, and we presume that in due time, he will have the opportunity for the investigation which he proposes. But why this should be offered as an excuse for keeping so silent respecting Both Sides, we are unable to see. However, as the work is now advertised in the Voice we leave it. The Right Spirit.—We sometimes feel constrained to withhold communications from the Review, although we are at the same time aware that it will be very liable to produce unpleasant feelings on the part of the writers. We should be as glad as any one, could we consistently gratify all our correspondents and publish everything that is written; but there are various reasons why we cannot, prominent among which is that some of the communications would not be creditable either to the writer or the Review. A brother who gives us the fullest liberty in the disposal of his communications, shows, we think a right spirit, and takes a right view of this matter in the following language: "Would to God that all editors were as careful of the reputation of their friends as the brethren at Battle Creek are of those who contribute to the publications of the S. D. A. Association." We recommend this position to all. D. Edson Smith. W. Y. Patterson of Buchanan, Mich., would be happy to have you write him at that place.