Independent Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Miss.) 1842-1844, 1843-10-28

''lndt III ult1 III uHS S'''0 Nsk'''NN '"N'
2 would steal too" AS VIC before remarked,
we did not attribute these words TO Mr..
t Clayton, but the substance might fairly be
inferred from what he did say. We do
not know that some Cascan ever said so.
hut we know that al! the democrats, bond
and anti-bond, with whom We have since
conyerscd, placed the same Construction
on Mr.. Claylon's words that we did,
Madison Iabors to show that there is an
inconsistency between our remarks as
above and an editorial in our paper Of the
Goth of July. We consider it almost cul-
pableto consume time in answering objec-l
tions SO silly, but having commenced TO
humor the fancies OF this writer we will
even indulge him in this. In the article
OF The date last named we conpiimented
the general bearing of Mr.. Clayton, his
gentlemanly appearance &c. The writer
has ita!icsed sentence from the article
which he seems to consider the strongest.
"IIe made very sensible speech, one
which did credit 10 him and the party
which selected him." Neither in this nor
in the whole article is there any approval
ofan argument he used or fact he stated.
The writer remarks with an appearance
of triumph, "How Mr.. CLAYTON could
have made a very sensible speech and yet
have told the anti bonders that they were
no better than he, that they would "steal
too" if they had the same chance he
had,is beyond my KEN" We would sug,
gest TO the writer that his "ken" may be
a very short one. The gentleman resem-
bles the mole in this particular, and prob
ably in some others. We did not say
that Mr.. C!ayton's speech had nothing OBJ
jectionable in it. We still think he made
avery sensible speech, hut we think alsl
itwould have been still more 50, if he
had omitted some things, and mentioned
others. In the course of two or three
hours man might make several objection
able remarks and yet on the whole have
nude very good speech. Bui further,
the article IF the Oh OF September was not
Gale out by Mr.. Clayion's speech;a sin
gle remark of his was incidentally men,
toned, and even if both articles had Ieen
written on tho same subject bat very
slight show of inconsistency could have
been made cut, but as it is, it is idle TO talk
Oft. TO conclude this point We neyerat-
| triluted the words mcnlionc to Mr.. Clay
ton. Madison peryerss and puts them into
his m nth. The object does not not APP
pear 50 much prove US inconsistent, as
to show by US that Mr.. Cliyto1 never said
anything from which the words mentioned
could be inferred. we think our remark
in both articles can,we stand together, but
if we arc wrong IN nnJ thing it was in say
that he made "yery sensible Speech for
he did say the words we attributed 10 him
20 moral and urdouLted certainty, ana
when the remark was m de his party shout
ed and applauled the disgraceful charge.
The writer says we took no notice oil this
remark at the time, that we said nothing
about "AIsalia and the Mint" nothing
about 'The broadest language OF vulgar
INSCRIPTIONS arrogance" &c. He might
have gone on and enumerated thousand
other things which we did not say. We
attempted no analysis of the speech at the
time, we att mpted to give nothing of what
Mr.. Clayton said. We have never at.
tempted any description of the speech to
this day. In an article on the general
conduct of the wings we mentioned sim
gle remark ofMr. Clayton. BY the man
ner in " hich Madison has mentioned the
words quot d, "the teeming vocabulary Of
Alsat:a and the mint,' and vulg9r unscru-
Pulous arrogance Sc, he would have ii
Inferred that we connect them now with
the name Of the wing candidate for gov
ernor! We never old so, and We have mol
idea that any one ever imagined it, except
one possessing the peculiar ''ken''of the
a,tu c Madison.
Ia the prosecution Of his valuable re-
searches, this writer with his usual philo.
iosophical accaiieness, has, with The aid Of
an"eminent iexi 'cgrapher'' discovered tbs.
.maamg Of the word "leader." eye
FfanAlin's, G Fulion's, .ss'ewton's, what