The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1849-10-25
nIisrspr...ns.sieas.

The wing press is snguarly careless 10 what il
reads reckless in what it says Il may choose either
horn OF the dilemma, best suits its taste. We have two
remarkable examples OF its outrageous misrepresentation
before US.
The Philadelphia North American OF the goth instant
refers to the circular Of the Secretary Of the Treasury
the reciprocity question, quotes the section Of the act Of
1917, which we have republshed. and then dashes of
into the following fragrant misrepresentation
The Washington Union seems regret that Mr.. Mere
diih did not give construction the existing laws by
which the repeal Of the British NAVIGATION would have
remained imperative, 80 far British commerce with this
county 10 concerned il IL difficult for locoocosm to find
word Of approval for tho administration even when its
policy conforms TO their convictions Of right on their
construction of q statute.
Either the North American did not read the article
on which pretends to comment il wfully msrepre
sents what II was impossible for il to mistake We have
urged for some lime past the shaping OF commercial
regulations to suit the late act of Great Britain We
deliberately stated the advantages ii would produce, and
enforced the duty Of accepting il. We rebuked the
Washington Republic, and the New York Courier. for
their attempt to throw cold water upon H. We censured
the delay OF the administration, and the policy which was
attributed to it, OF waiting till Congress should meet and
again act upon the subject This known to be our
position when Mr. Meredith was urged. by the imporu
nifty Of the merchants and their apprehension that the
administration would not meet the question became
them, TO address the house in New York, and to issue
his circular to the custom houses In the articles
which we wrote upon these two papers we defy any
liberal man to produce the slightest variation in our
tone, or the slightest apparent "reger at the course
which the Secretary had pursued, TO give efficiency to
the operations of the British statute Our whole article
expressed very different meaning and the most chara-
BILE construction which can put upon the uniounded
assertion of the North American is to suppose that
did not read the article which makes its rdcu
lous suggestion.
Not less extraordinary is the following assertion Of the
Martinsburg (Va) Gazette, wing paper. Of the AID
inst:
No one doubt the sincerity of the Union in the pres
ent instance, when It is known violently opposed
every important act of Gen. Tayl0rs administration Il op-
posed the demand for Rey who had been orcby
from our SOIL" DC, &c.
Now all our readers who have read with any care the
whole stream OF articles which have emanated from our
pen on this subject will at the despicabe mis-
representation OF which the Marnsburg editor has been
guilty. From the very moment of the abduction Of Rey
at New Orleans, we called upon the administration to
demand his restitution. We repeated this call uniformly
from time to time, until he was sent back to New Or
eans and not content with this restitution we have in
sisted, with all the clearness and all the force which we
could throw into our composition, that il the Spanish
consul was concerned in the abduction, he should be
cashered, by cancelling his exequatur But this is
not all We contended further, that If the Captain Gen.
eral OF Cuba should be found to be concerned in the con-
spiracy, demand should be made at Madrid for his re-
call. And yet here is this rabd and reckless wing ed
tor asserting, without the slightest evidence, that we
have opposed the demand for Reyw