Boon's Lick times. [volume] (Fayette, Mo.) 1840-1848, 1845-11-01
MACKENZIE'S BOOK.

of Letters, and quotes from New York pa.
pers, one of them wing, which condemns
their original publication, and classes all
who copy from the book, with the compi-
ler-who, it is assumed, stole the letters:
hence, those who copy or receive the stolen
letters, are no better than the thief.
First and foremost, the assumption that
the letters were stolen has not been sus-
tained-on the contrary, the compiler
distinctly states that he came in possession
of the letters by no act of fraud or deceit,
and challenges investigation. But this is
immateriaI: the letters were gotten posses.
sion of and published in book, with the
name of a responsible and respectable per-
son attached thereto, and submitted to the
world-extensively read and copiously OK
tracted from. We do not approve of their
original publication, and had they been orr
gnolIy left with US to publish, we should
have forwarded them to their owner
But they were Observation-Disclosures and
read-were in form that they would be
read independent of our publishing-thcy
contain matters in which the public are
deeply interested-sustain charges that we
have frequently made against the leaders Of
the democratic party, unsustained fully ex-
cept by our moral convictions of their
truth-were calculated 10 open the eyes of
the people in reference to the dishonesty
Of set of men who had their confidence
but to abuse it-and under all these crcum-
stances, and governed by all these reasons.
we copied from the printed book and shall
do so again-despite the croakings Of those
who may be exposed. or the bushes and
cringes of their friends and followers. We
again repeat, distinctly, we condemn their
original publication; but, being pub
lshed, in the shape they are, we should feel
that we had failed TO discharge our duty
to the public, had we passed them by with
out q notice--and no notice would answer
so well as the letters themselves.
Thus much in justification of the part we
have acted. Now for the honesty and
purity of those who attack us--and their
friends and witnesses.
The New York Courier and Enquirer is
one of the witnesses quoted against US.
Any one who has looked through the book
and seen how often the name of the editor
of that paper appears, can very readily
imagine why it is that he objects to their
publication. Besides that paper has pub
lished private letters, and by some means
its editor got possession of treaty ASH
burton, we believe) and made it public
before the Senate had disposed of it in Sc
cret session. SO much for this witness Of
the Democrat.
Another New York paper is quoted
which was guilty of publishing during the
last Presidential canvass, private letter of
the Hon. II. Clay to c. M. Clay, which
was stolen, unopened, from the office of
the New York Tribune--and which, if we
mistake not, was published in the Hiss u,i
Democrat, with much gustol Of we are
mistaken in this, we desire to be corrected;
a reference to the files will determine the
matter) There are numerous other in
stances in which the locofoco press have
been guilty of publishing private docu-
umcnts, from the original manuscript copy,
which had been stolen or forcibly seized,
which could be referred to if necessary,
and they now lift their hands in holy hor-
ror at wing editors for extracting from q
Printed Book!
Is the Democrat satisfied?
Let us see, however, before we drop this
subject, if we cannot find a case nearer
home--of which many Of our readers no
doubt have distinct rccolIcclion-and in
which some Of the Democrats particular
friends acted a very conspicuous part.
During the canvass of 1910, Gen. Clark,
then a candidate for Governor, while can.
vassing the State, addressed letter to Col.
Birch, then a resident Of this place, on mat
tiers connected with the canvass. That let
ter found its way into the columns of the
Democrat. Col, Birch called on the editor
to know how he came in possession of it.
1t was furnished him by c. +. jackson.
then Cashier Of the Bank, who, it was sub
scquenlly ascertained, got it from Owen
ltawlins, that year the successful candidate
for the Senate, from this county. Where
did he get the letter? When called on by