PILGRIMS PROGRESS.
{"newspaper_name": "The Columbian fountain.", "edition": "01", "page": "p2", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 1677, "word_count": 309, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9648000001907349], "ccnet_perplexity": [934.9000244140625], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
The Boston Olive Branch is very wrong, in.
our opinion, in striving TO justify the reading
of such novels and tales as il sometimes pub
fishes by referance 10 the celebrated religious
allegory OF Bunyan. There is vast dispari-
ty. Take, for instance, that tale which ap-
peared in a recent number OF that journal,
called The Rag Gatherer' We read it in or
der to form some idea Of the novels published
by the Olive Branch; and we are sorry to say,
that ii, like some other tales published here
tofore in the same (otherwise) excellent paper,
is calculated to produce fondness for that
kind Of light literature which can never profit
lis readers. If The Pilgrims Progress is no.
vel in The modern sense Of the term, we never
so understood il TO be; but certainly TO SUCH
novels as il is we could have no reasonable
objection. ssh, st4 M


We do not pretend to say we are ourselves
altogether free from the imputation of having
gwen publicity to some articles Of fictitious
character which had as well never seen the
light; nor would we ever suspect our brethren
ofthe Olive Branch Of being less desirous than
veto promote the best interests of the reading
community: but we will assert that there is
too much carelessness with us all on this
point. Our columns. if read at all, must ex-
ert a good or bad infuence-ahere is not, nor
would we desire, a possibility Of its being 9th
erwise. Only let us see to it that what we
publish shall be calculated to do good We
have the control Of this matter, and are re-
sponsible for every article we suffer to go into
our papers. There is great danger Of accom-
modating ourselves too much to the vitiated
taste of some Of our readers. g