Independent Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Miss.) 1842-1844, 1844-08-14

lionally make this impression. We dl
not say they made it intentionally, S
where is the misstatement. That the
ibid make this Impression, we can PROV
by gentleman of high respeciabilit
whe lives in this place, and is a promi
nent man in the wing ranks.
The writer next says here is miss!ate
ment the fourth:
aAmember of the democratic commit
tee promptly informed them that the dem,
ocrats did not wish TO confne the discus
sion to this county, but they said il wa:
too late, the committee had reported, ant
they refused to change their report aliho'
the meeting confined in session two OF
three hours afterwards. = s
We were not present at this confer,
ence, and our information was derived
from the member of the democratic com,
mlttee who made the explanation above
alluded to, and we have no doubt of its
correctness. If however, the reason we
gave be not the true one, it certainly is
not half SO preposterous as the one the
writer himself gives, which is "that it
was not in the power Of single member
OF the committee or of the wing commit
tee to change resolution of the demo.
cratic association they having no right
to question the authority of the committee.
The writer has changed word in our
article which we think worthy of note: we
remarked that we had "heard such swag-
gering bravery vaunted in the neighbor.
hood of groceries, and around suffers
wagon at camp MUSTER" the writer
makes the latter word scamp NEE ting"
This may have been done for the purpose
OF exciting against us the members of a
large and respectable religious class, or it
may have been accidental. Whichever wa,
it was, we disclaim having used the word
scamp meeting"
We intend to enter into no controversy
with an anonymous writer; we have there
lore mace this article as brief as possible.
We will however say TO our assailant, we
nave no "gangrened political hate" TO in
iulge, we have no "malice and revenge''
o crafty. What we have done has always
'een unde: sense of duty, and IN strict
accordance with what we believed to be
ruth, and We again repeat that those who
now the editor of this paper, know that
he had made any misstatement, it would
ave been instantly corrected upon his
cling convinced of the fact. WHY then
lis useless parade of the degrading words !
misrepresentation" "false," and "the G
ord is greatly given to lying" Iii
no our ossuilant says "it is no part of his
ystem TO say the Democrat has stated Q
hat II knows to be FALSE" and che attri-
utes to us no formed design to misrepre-
,nt," but under such circumstances he
Mould hove applied to US no disgraceful i,
pithets. He seems to be some vain .
oupg man who wished to have the credit g
abusing and vilifying the editor OF
ewspaper, but yet dislked to meet the
onsequences. He says:
1t would be edifying to the people in 6
lese parts, il the editor would give them
inkling of the place where his slain re. {
ose, and which one of them had The I'm. 6
rislian audacity to place him in real 6
anger" "
We are happy 10 say our "slain" still +"
Ieathc this upper air, and as mono of
EN- have ever had the ''unchristian au- :,
lcity TO place US in real DANGER" this 8,
ritter is, and doubtless will continue to &c
;, one of the number. A petty vanity, g
wish 10 pander to the appetite of /"
ose who feed on denunciaton and per- .
nal abuse, prompts him TO the utterance :,
insulting words, but anon taking coun- 6.
! of his nerves, he hastens TO atone for g.
S indiscrelion. If he believed us capa- I"
e of knowingly uttering falsehoods, after
ating the fact, he should have made no S
PLANTATION; if he believed US honest in n,
hat we said, his language should have .,
EN- respectful. 4,
We last week prepared an answer TO 81
me remarks in the Creole on the SUBJ Z
ct of Mr.. Polk's letter. twas crowded be
t last week, with number of other ar st
loo C,,Loc,c,. n..:s -, W