The Lancaster gazette. (Lancaster, Ohio) 1846-1852, 1848-08-25
NEW SERIES---YOL. 3. NO. l6.

two parts-a few remarks upon the veto
power and very many upon the war
Question.
OfGeneral Taylor, he said he loved
and esteemed the old man; he had served
under him; he was brave, good and a
great man; he was an honest (nlark it!)
an honest man. But he had placed him.
self in aposition, where he had no right to
complain ifbis young officers should think
and say hard things about him. He had
allowed himself to become the "tool of a
miserable faction Of traitors"-"6e had
placed himself IN the hands Of reckless and
dtshonest demag0gues" s"-"he had alioved
these men to create, an his breast, an ambs-
ton, which neither God nor nature had
implanted there"
How an honest man, q man of strong
intellect, of strict integrity, can allow him
self to be placed in such situation, to
become the "tool" of designing dema-
gogues (worse than the demagog c him
self) is for Mister Morgan to answer
Either the speaker means that General
Taylor is man Of strong intellect and
dishonest, or else that he is honest and
has very weak mind-in either case he
tells that which is proven false by wit.
nesses better capable of jud ging and hav-
ing better advantages to Judge than him.
self; and in either case Mister Morgan
becomes the slanderer of Gen. Zachary
Taylor, his old commander, whose fame
should be as dear to the speaker as his
own. But our readers must remember
that it is Mister Morgan, who speaks;
should Colonel Morgan speak, we would
expect different course. We close with
the following similar, and to our minds,
conclusive comparison. Should we speak
ofGen. Cass as an honest, an intelligent
talented and upright man, (by the way
entering "caveat" that no locofoco
should go way and say that we slan6ered
General Cass,) and then should say that
he had allowed himself to become tool
of set of black-legs, counterfeiters OF
sharpers, would we be Slandering Gen
Cass, or would we notl That is the sim
pie rule to be applied in the present case
and if Mister Morgan's remarks are meas
ured by it, we only have to say, that we
envy not the position, in which the MIS-.
ter places the Colonel.
The orator, owing to his feeble health
we suppose, had a promp,er, in the per.
son OF the Prosecuting Attorney of Hook.
ing. Prosecuting Attorneys, nova.
days, are great individuals. and candi-
dates for that distinguished station are
greater. Mr.. Drake, we are informed
did up his part very well, in the way of
putting words, epithets and ideas in the
mouth of the speaker, Only one time
we learn, he made an error. He told the
speaker to say Granny Ford" but as
that title had damaged the party in 1910
he rejected it. 1t is evident that Mister
Morgan is not perfectly versed in the arts
oflhe demagogue. He came very near
sitting down without making one effort to
gull the Germans aud Irish into the sup
port of his party. But the prompter rem
edied this and the speaker very good ma
turedly thanked him. and passed very
pretty eulogum upon foreign volunteers.
Why this necessity The eulogium was
we'll earned, but why attempt to divide
the citizens of this country, by such odi-
GUS distinctions. When the foreigner
gets his naturalization papers and takes
the oath to support the Constitution, he
is Just as much of an American as Mis-
ter Morgan, and when Gen. Scott, in his
dispatches, speaks of the gallantry of his
troops, he means naturalzed citizens as
much as he does Col. Morgan, aud does
not write seperate despatch in praise of
them, Distinguishing them from native
born Americans. When the speaker al.
luded 10 the gallantry and bravery of the
American troops, did he or did he not
mean the naturalzed troops? If he didn't
he was certainly very choice of his praise
If he did, why the necessity of referring
to them again, thus keeping alive distinc,
tions, which ought not to be known in
this country2 Probably prompter Drake
can inform us.
One word more and we have done with
the speech of Mister Morgan. A volun.
teer, who was in Mexico with him, who
esteemed the man and loved the Colonel,
having heard what kind of speeches Mis-
ter Morgan made, said that "he would
not go to hear him. He loved and es-
teemed Colonel Morgan for his conduct
in Mexico, aud he did not wish to alter
his opinion of the Colonel bv seeino tho