Mobile register and journal. [volume] (Mobile, Ala.) 1841-1849, 1845-05-07

/
| he a general rally Of The party.
In The late speech of Lord John Russell on the
Oregon question, in The British House OF Commons,
he repeated the British assertion of lille, on the
ground Of discovery by Vancouver. "paHeourfr
| he said, "d'scoraed The Oregon"
British authorities do not, it appears, all agree
with Lord john in this assertion. Among the cent
repuhIicaIions by The Harpers, small volume
which we believe is pau OF the Edinburgh Cabinet
Library. aud forms No. l72 oil Harper's Family Ii.
braty, entitled Voyage Round the Id, from the
death Of Captain Cook to the present time" II Is
abstract ofthe larger narratives, and therefore re-
fleets the understanding Of the originals by The com
piler. In several parts belrays strong dislike TO
the United States.
| Now the reader Of this volume will find IN page
SO, The narrative of an interview between Vancouver
and Captain GRAY. in which it is said that Gray
gave Vancouver information Of his own previous
voyages on the coast and that she mentioned that
he had been al the mouth Of river in latitude 46
degrees 10 minutes north, where the CURRENT or per-
haps retlux Of The tide, strong as 10 prevent
his entering it for nine days"
This Captain Gray Of the ship Columbia, and
here Is the British record that he had discovered the
mouth OF the river, and told his discovery to Van
cuuver.
Indeed, this is among the most unquesto facts
in history, notwithstanding Lord Iohn Russell ques-
toned it IN Parliament, by claiming the discovery
for Vancouver himself
This is recent book, made up with IA previous
KIN, Wedge Of the Importance 10 Great Britain of
stating rms case strongly as possible on her
side BIT the original is much stronger. Vancouver
named one Of the capes the Of the kiile
Bay, Cape disappointment, because he could not
fad river, and it noted in his log book, be-
fore he had an interview with Gray.
We find the following article in the last number oil
the Tuscaloosa Flag and Journal:''
''The Mobile Register has taken very unusual IL
herty with paragraph OF ours relative TO the APP
pointneHt Of MIR. MEEK, both in giving particular
significance 10 lew lines which it has thought pro-
per tacise, aud in locating its import the
Gently appointed charge to Venezuela. BY what
right the Reg lser selects particular individual,
coming within the range Of remarks, more parli-
cuarly than others, will not seek To divine. Men
seldom take home 10 themselves, friends, the
sual remarks OF newspaper, unless there is truth
! in them. So far as appointments 10 Office con-
necied with tins matter, we have this TO say-tha
recognize devotion to democracy, and untirng eff
forts 10 advance lis influence and power the bes
recommendation. If men, withn the democratic
/ ria nks are found with folded, mere pass live
spectators, where the fight is raging hottest and
thickesl, # all their zeal for principle, like Boil
Acres courage, finds lis way TO their fingers ends
because their particular choice for office may be
elevated, deny their CLAIMS the party for ad
vancement and quesiiuR the proprieiy of rewarding
them before lis more worthy members. We have mo-
Thing further to say, than these general observations
, in favor Of, OF against The appointment OF MIR
SHIELDS. We recolec his services in Congress
,,,,A b.,.. nm, ti,an cd in
full Justice; but cannot recognize The issue the
Register has thought Fit TO make IN his behali-tha
'sIhe mt Urly" ot the democratic party have spe
ciaI interest IN his elevation. 1t is sometimes ver
convenient identify indiy duas in this way, viii
the who in truth know but little and les
about them; Or 10 hold them up, when personal in
terest is sought to he advanced as The most inpor
lani men of particular division of "a pary-lh
Register has il "a la ge majority Of The party
We recognise no Zine of DIVISION in the democsa
: tic party" and however convenient il may be, il
certain quarters. for individual purposes, 10 make
"past differences, pretext for measuring up tIes
! thngs-they will not receive, from prudent, dscree
men any more favor Or sanction than the effort OF lin
Register to make MIR. Shields the Atlas of the de
mocratlc party"
This is a very unsatisfactory reply to a well found
ed complaint Of ours, Il, the covert attacks Of tn
Journal and Flag, upon prominent democrat in III
State. To speak more plainly, il is AN evasio
which does not conceal the hostile meaning whic
il pretends to disclaim The Journal went out G
its way, in compimentins Mr.. MEEK's appointment
at Washington. 10 say that it ought to have been
higher one. comparing the utle of ''Mr. Meek an
his tliends' to the confidence Of the admmislratio
with those Of other persons who have received ore
appointments. There is but one man in this Stat
who has received foreign appointment, and onl
one way, as democrat. IN which line of distinc
L
Meek" Yet when we remark the effort at depre
citation. distinctly declared in this way. the Journa
wonders why we should give ''parucular sgnifi
clnce its words. and calls ''unusual liberty
TO presume that there any particular meaning o
reference to individuals in its ''casual remarks =
We took CELEBRITY" it seems, in presuming tina
the editor meant any thing in ''pariicular' coun
tenanced any "partcular' division Of the Larty, Q
referred to any "particular" person, when II voun
tcered To exalt person and his friends, ano
Their person who had been appointed abroad! Thu
Journal should learn not words that say grea
dea !, when it does not intend to have its meaning
understood be subject to remark by those when
it intended by insnualion to assail.
The assertion that the Register made Gan issue il
behalf of MIR. Shields. that majority Of the part,
WAS u special effort make him "the Atlas of III.
democratic party" is the conage of "A ds;emperet
imagination. The Register resisted the attempt o
The Journal to throw slight upon Mr. Shields, FOL
the reason expressed-tha he was not Of the cas
Of "frends" whom the Journal and Flag me ans " her
il speaks of those who ought be pr eferred to MIR
Shields. That attempt to divide and prescribe be
gan with the article Of the Journal, to which we in
terposed check. and il to us that it would be
more candid in that paper to meet our inquiries an,
define its position asked, rather than conden,
it was discovered that it would be permitted Il
pass without fall discussion of its pretensions.
The repetition and aggravalon of the insinualion:
in the article above against Mr.. Shields, are sulf
cieut 10 chalk out distinctly if they broad
y asserted the personal intention of the first article
and an article which lately appeared in The Charles
ton Mercury. in which Mr.. Shields was PERSONAL,
brought up to imply censure against Mr.. Polk for APP
pointing him, explains the grounds O. objection
without paraphrase disguise. 1t is that he voted
for Mr.. Van Buren, alone OF the delegation of this
State, until Polk was nominated. That article has
had an extensive circulation in this St'le, and il
creates reason why we should execute soon, what
we have been long prepared to do, the task of writ.
ing some portion of the history Of the Baltimore Con
yention, which bears upon this point, VIZ: what in.
fuence there nominated MIR. Polk. Mr.. Shield.