The northern tribune. [volume] (Bath, Me.) 1847-1855, 1848-04-19

lions winch MS OVer-neaLeQ zeal OF Wallb VI
wisdom led him to take at the late convention
held in this city. He had better have let the
matter remain as it was after the convention,
since every attempt to clear himself only in
wolves him the more deeply in absurdities.
His last letter is addressed to US, and rart
of it is made up of abuse of ourselves, which
shows that even the State Agent of the party
that claims all the christianity, can sometimes
let his angry passions rise, and manifest tenn
per not altogether such as might be expected
from one of the ssintS However tits pref
ty sure sign that man is used up when he in
dulges in such expressions of temper in con-
troversy. The part of the article not referring
to us is filed with an abortive attempt to make
himself appear a consistent and straight.for-
ward man, and with renewed attacks on Mr.
Webster.
After abusing ourselves for exposing his
misrepresentation, Mr.. Davis goes on to say
"The statements which made in regard to
Mr.. Webster and the Ten Regiment Bill, SO
far from being 'falsehoods, are adnesttcd by
yourself to be rrue. They were-tha,-a.p to
that time, he had shown no opposition to the
bill, and on every vote that had then been TAX
! en-, he scos absent
In answer to the above, we unAesitatingly and
positioely declare that these statements alluded
to above were not those made in Mr.. Davis
opening speech, or what we called, in our ar
ticle to which this letter of Mr. Davis is re-
ply, his deliberate speech, but are in substance
the confessions Mr.. Davis made after the un-
fairness and deceptive character of his ''delib-
crate statements had been exposed. His
statement in the opening speech mot the adj
missions he was afterwards driven to make
was that Mr.. Webster was absent when the
cote on the Ten Regiment bill was taken, CIV
ing the impression that the vote on the pas
sage of that bill had been taken, and that Mr..
Webster had lodged that vote. Those who
were present will recollect distinctly that Mr..
Davis made no reference whatever, in his first
speech, to any particular vote on that bill pre-
vious to the passage of the bill, but spoke Of
the uote on the Ten Regiment bill. Now what
else could be understood what else could Mr..
Davis have intended should be understood by
this but the vote on the final passage of the
bill. He was so understood, and when he was
replied to by Mr.. Morse that gentleman ex-
pressed his surprise that any man, protesting
to be lover of truth, should seek to leave
such an impression on the minds of an audi
ence, and stated that when the last accounts
left Washington the question had not been
taken, nor was there prospect of its being
taken for some days to come-a powerful OPP
position being made to it by the Whigs-and
that Mr.. Webster himself, relieved from his
duties in the Supreme Court, was preparing to
make a speech in opposition to (which
speech he has since delivered. Mr.. Davis was
told, if Mr.. Webster was absent when any
vote was taken, it must have been vote on
some amendment, which probably was of lit
tie consequence. Mr.. Davis here confessed
that the vote to which he alluded was on an
amendment, or at least on the question wheth-
er Mr.. Calhoun's proposition should be taken
up frst-a question of no Importance, since
both bills could be brought before the Senate,
and both were for raising men. A vote, too,
on this question would commit man neither
way. This admission of Mr.. Davis, there
fore, does away with the whole force of his
charge, and establishes the fact that we have
asserted, that his statements were calculated
to deceive, and it requires more than common
charity to suppose that he did not mean to de-
ceive.
M. Davis says his statements are admitted
by ourselves to be true. We have admitted
lust what we here state-we have never adj
ro;+ted anvthino more We do not even ad.