Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1845-02-07
THE JOURNAL.
Friday, February, Z, 1s45.
,Th. D.logat.on from New H anover. again.

ware of our inability to do justice to the
New Hanover Delegation. in our article oil p
last week. OF course the solemn dictum p
pronounced in the Chronicles article set ia
Ties the point. II is fortunate, however,.
that the members Of the New Hanover g
Delegation occupy such position, that. s
notwithstanding our poor abilities to de- y
fend them, and the overwhelming power a
with which they are assailed by the Edi- G
tor of the Chronicle, still they are in little d
danger of suffering. either from the weak =
ness Of their humble defender. or from the
awful power with which they are asssiled 4
by the Chronicle.
The Chronicle says that our vindication
of Mr.. Nixon rests upon the assumption
that he is not the representative of those
citizens OF Wilmington who interested
themselves in furshering the Canal scheme,
consequently, he was under no obligation
to consult their interests and wishes"
Here, at the very Outstart, is either viii
full Misrepresentation or total misaPpre-
hension of what we said. When or where
did we ever say that Mr.. Nixon was not
the representative of ALL the citizens of
New Hanover. the people of Wilmington,
as well as those Of any other portion ofthe
county According TO our reading of the
article we wrote, we, in it, said no such
thing. "They meaning the citizens OF
Wilmington are nothing in the Journals
estimate Of the constituent body; mere cy-
pliers, entitled to no manner Of considera
tIon," says the Chronicle. When the
Chronicle again sits down TO write an edi-
toriaI, we would thank him TO speak of
what he knows, and not put sentiments
20 our credit which NC never have either
uttered or entertained. The Chronicle. IN
its FIRST article, took occasion to say that
Mr.. Nixon should have stated on the floor
of the House, that his constituents would
"disapprove" of the amendment offered by
Mr.. Femming and accepted by him. We
asked the Chronicle how he had ascertain
ed that Mr.. Nixon's constituents would
disapprove Of his course in this matter
whether or not MIR. Nixon was the repre-.
sentative of the people of New Hanover
county. or of the inhabitants of any partic-
Blar precinct. We would now ask the
Chronicle" again, suppose he himself
were a representative from this county,
would he consider himself in conscience
bound to carry out the wishes of the great
mass Of his constituents or would he dis
regard those and obey the dictates Of a
small portion ofthem! The duty Of the
representative, if we understand anything
Of the structure of our institutions, is, to
reflect the will of his constituents. We
think that the Delegation from New Han
over county was guided by this cardinal
principle in the course which it pursued
during the last session Of the Legislature.
We presume the "Chronicle" thinks that
the Delegation from this county should
never for moment give sing lie thought
to what are the wishes or desires Of any
portion of its constituents. who live in
any other part of the county beyond the H.
mits Of the town of Wilmington, whist i
is performing its legislative duties. We
however. have had the temerity to differ
with the "ChronicIe" on this point. We
are willing to leave the arbtremcnt of this
difference Of opinion to the constituent
''that enterprIsing citizens OF Wilmington
DC. &C." are stigmaiSed by 'press" il
this place. We desire to sHgmalise nc
man nor set OF men. If the "Chronicle'
or any 9th ar individual is DESTROYS Of TAXI Ing
offence at the word clique, they may make
the most Of it. Amongst the names which
the "Chron.cle" says took an active part il
the Canal matter, we see those of tw.
leading members of that party with whict
we have the honor of acting. As we have
acted in the whole matter entirely in ODE
dience to the dictates Of our own prva,
judgment. we did not at FIRST, nor do w
now stop to enquire, how many more q
our own party differ with US in the cours
we have pursued.
The "Chronice" has arraignel the De
legation from New Hanover before the ba
of public opinion. We are perfectly vii
ling, that the members of that delegation
should stand or fall by the verdict which
public opinion may render. We-and 81
feel confident the members Of the DeIega
ton too-are willing to abide by such yer
dict.
In our last article. we were mistaken il
saying that Mr.. Regain from Robson wa
In the act ofrisIng to propose similar a
men'tment to Mr.. Flemming's, when tina
gentleman proposed his. We should nav
said DR.. Robinson from Baden. Nh
Regan. however, as we'll as almost all tn
members from that section of the State
which would be most likely to be benefit