Democratic banner., 1847-06-07

portions from the Banner, and then, m"tlla-
ting those extracts, in order to reply to
them more efectually. This "effort to con-
vict" the Journal of "unfairucss" was not
"uncandid and unworthy of us. 1t was
not "'uncandid," for we believed (indeed
the Journal itself was our esilence If The
fact) that our language had been mntilated,
and we canANy told the Journal 50; MOI
was it "unwortIry" of us, for the ~''effort to
convict was successful in convicting.
We had charged 4 ''portion'' of the wlig
press with inconsistency and trickery, for
denouncing the war, yet praisinS the war
riors: for coudenning the citizen-civiiian,
who supported the war with words, yet
congratulating the citizen-so,dicr, who sup
iported the war by deeds: for condemning
the President, who as they say began the
war, yet j~ustifying the people, who elect
ed that war President, with the express I'M
Outstanding that his election would be fol-
lowed by war. In commenting on these
charges against so p0rft'n, and ONLY THAT
PORTION Of the wiiigprcss. which had been
most rabid in its denunciations of the war;"
the Journal AFFILIATED Cur language, and
then, unfairly, drew an inference that we
meant the whole wing party and the entire
wing press; vociferously insisting that "a
pOrti0n" meant the WHOLE. We were
somewhat surprised, then, at that inference
and complained of it: but We suffer no sur
prise nOW at his, that the mhoke means a
For the journalist, whose pow
ers of discrimination extend to the length
of proving that a portion, means the whole,
will find no difficulty in proving that the
whole is 10 more than a portion. He ap-
pears to think that a rule ought to work
both ways, and we believe that no one will
deny, that in this case it has done so; it be-
ing eq"aHy clear in both examples.
The Journal having stated, that, "rHAr
PORTION of the wing press, which has been
most rabid in its opposition to the war;"
means the whole press, comes out, in anoth-
er article, and "confesses its inability TO al
ter the Interpretation, which it had given
before;" and yet after thus declaring its ina
bility to alter it, adds, at means to charge
the whig press (the Jody of it) has,
been opposed 70 the war, and that a PORTION
If ii has been MOST RABID in its dcnuncia-
So, Mr.. Journalist, a portion, in
the first place, is equal to the whole, and in
the second place, a portion is equal to a por-I
ton. If then, accordingt to the Journals
W showing, "THAT Portion Of the whig|
press, which has been most rabid in its op-
postum to the war;" means as the Journal
says that it does, "That portion of it that
has been MOST RABID in its dcnunciotions.' -
We quite agree; the meanings are the same.
But, then, if the remaining part is the body,
as a matter of course, "That portion of it,,
that has been most rabid," must of neces-
sity be the head and tail. To this division,
we beg leave to subscribe our approval
The Nat. Int. ct id omne genus, will, like
the lion in the fable, take the "head'' on
account of their superiority, anu conse-
be the mouth piece. The Journal
would of itself assign this position to them;
and as the body, and head, are disposed Of,
Hannibal Journal, ct SUM g%eneris, must
of necessity take the "tail." We would
counsel the Journal, to maintain this posi-
ton with as much dignity as its depend
emit situation will permit. 1t is not always
the mao"h, speaking great swelling words,
that is the best defence. An animal much
noted for sagacity, ycleped a "Fox," makes
use of his brush against his pursuers with
success. There are other animals
wot of, that have their whole maya
zine of mischief in that vicinity. And
can be no good reason shewn, why
he tail of a coon, properly prepared, would
not be equally eficacious.
But the Journal should leave talking toI
he mouth piece, and only indulge itself in
IN occasional whisk. It's peculiar strength
les in whisking. 1t should never attempt