The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1849-09-27

| We lay before our readers the following extract
OF an article from the Philadelphia Bulletin, which
has generally but not idolauousy been disposed 70
support General Taylor and his measures In these
views the "Buetn" speaks with some superfiuous se-
verify OF M Poussin We were at some loss TO UNDER
stand what the editor by personal Sights until,
looking into the next column Of his paper, we found
Washington letter from the New York Herald, which
states that member Of M. Poussins family had been
designedly omitted in diplomatic dinner al the White
House. We know not what the fact was. nor the effect
which it is said to have had upon the minister:
From the Philadelphia sulls.In
THE PoussM CORRESPONDENTS THAT our remarks on tho
ment and the French minister have met with the unan-
ous approval Of the nteligen, Of citizens has
we have II received from he most aassi
ing To find for the half Of these spis
8lg NV
The TIM, ascertain rs:psssng ss true e
France In is origin The quarrel appears have been Of
entirely personal character social difficulty between
NJ Poussin and the best society in Washington first
perated that eentleman's feelings, and ailsrwsrds By
e 81 q
ought have been We regard M. Poussin conduct
sss ss Once
we have sympathy for him in his disgrace. A man
could allow his personal to affect his pubic Conduct
is neither worthy be the representative Of great naon
IL a be and n
republican, but he is good-ior nothing minister.
,egret . say Is not as In ias here ruth
than poleness in M DE Tocqueyiles remark that the
acerbty and harshness Of the correspondence twas
alone applicable the letters written BY the minister Of
Fmncet' Weare forced, unwlngy indeed admit that
partial mind saying that Mr. Caytons letter g M Pous
sim summonng the latter to Washington, II "estimated
TO be rather imperious summons than diplomatic in
vtalion." written in tone 50 peremptory and
he hall angry relations existing between tie two gentle.
men, For the credit OF nation. wish the letter had
ror to an Inferior OF equal equal Il 10 just
the kind an episile which Frenchman the French
Again In the letter rom MI Clayton 10 Mr. Rush, there
explicit request for the recall Of M Poussin There
voy but the desired recall is LETT to be Inferred and M de
Tocqueye, without being very stupid either, may have
he Sses hs his Isp II NJ DC Tooqusvs had stopped
here he would have been wise but in to divide
commiied offence against diplomatic civity We have
already said that there is ruth in his remark, but
asserted ssa his G for in oensains Mr. Clayton impedy
censured our government whereas the Presidents COM
did not involve the French nation. We great diff
erence between the two things.
NJ do Tocquevile, especially that portion Of il which
informs the latter tnry, hat he invited 70 decide
eminent conducted that correspondence which was not
only courteous and respectful in terms, but entirely
y reply 81 10
exhibits more frbeaIance and wisdom than either Mr.
Tier making every effor. be entirely impartial that
bunders have been committed on both sides more on the
Of M Poussn indeed Than on that Of Mr. Clayton but
Nevertheless, II war should grow ofhis correspond
should not rise to-monowws shall be prepared % stand
by country, and not emulate those who though now
o e, esr,enIy ~ as any thas could
possibly spring from the dismissal of NJ Poussin