The Evansville daily journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ia. [i.e. Ind.]) 1848-1862, 1851-07-16

rhe Inference between them
Speaking Of DeBruler, the Princeton Ga
zion says. that gentleman "would be willing
to vote for an appropriation OF millions Tor
the East TO procure thousands for the West"
Now we say he would not--and thus far as
sertion balances assertion. We now ask the
Clarion for proof of its unfair and unlound-
ed charge. He 'knows as well rs we do, that
DeBrulerisin favor of no such thing-and
we do not know how or where Kurtz has won
such a character for veracIty as to render it
10 the slightest degree probable, that DeBru-
Ter would pursue so abominable "a course.
merely because Kurtz says he would. Mr..
Deb. ON the contrary is only willing to vote
forappropriations Of a limited nature to the
East, because he knows as does every other
sensible man, that unless he do vote for such,
he can never be Of service in getting appro-
priauions for the West. But Lockhart has
pledged himself not to vote for a single Eas-
tern appropriation till the West receivs all
she wants-which, according TO the way
things unfortunately are, is just tantamount
10 saying he will vote for no River and Har-
Dor bill likely to be presented to Congress
while he is a member, if elected. Kurtz
knors that no bill can pass Congress for
years to come giving appropriations TO the
West alone. He knotrs that the East and
South will demand some appropriations
however willing they may be to give the
West a great deal, and that they will aot
give the West her demands, unless in the
same bill is comprised something for them
And he knows that under this state OF things,
Lockhart can do nothing for the West IL he
abide by his pledge.
Lockhart is not even in lavorof appropria-
tons for Western rivers Alter stating nh is
speech here most emphatically that he was
in invor OF appropriations for improvements
ct r'vers-runnIng through or between States,
which would have included the Wabash and
a number Of other Of the smaller streams
finding some Of che old fashioned Democrats
objected to this position, he made a cofrec-
ton IN his own organ here. which stated I.e
was emily in favor Of appropriations for rivers
running directly to the ocean. THIS would
make him an advocate for appropriations to
improve number Of Eastern and Northern
rivers, and so far as the West is concerned.
only the Mississippi river. In other words
he says distinctly he will not vote for single
Eastern appropriation ill The West is salts
hed-and then in his own organ states he is
IN favor of appropriations by Government
for all rivers and emily those running di,ectig
to the Ocear-fhat is fer score of Eastern
and Northern rivers and only one Western
rivcr. That is Judge Lockharton Govern
ment appropriations. Now we ask in all sin
'cerly, what man in favor of the great pria-
ciple OF appropriations by Government for
The improvement of Western Rivers will
vote or can consistently vote for Lockhar,l
what man, Wing or Democrat. who is in IA.
~or OF the commerce Of the Ohio, and tlis
lives and properly of those wl,otravel on il
being protected by Government, and III,
money necessary Tor sec1rng this protce,ior
scattered among the laborers OF the We
and those upon whom they directly or indi
rectly depend-will vote for Loskharf? -,
ask these questions in no party spirit. bu
out irem our sincere desire TO see no man /,
tie West elected to Congress-, no matter I,
which party he belong, unless be he a fbor
ough and unfiinching Western Improve
'nens man-and Lockhart can in no mapne
DC considered such by his best friends Ever,
cry man in business is interested. djrec,l
OF incorrectly, IN the commerce Of our rivers
IL matters not whether he live IN the inter-
or or on the rivers, he is interested more prob
ably than he thinks in this question. De
bruler is perfectly sound and consistent i
IN his views. while Lockhart has proreI
himself rotten TO the core, on the subject