The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1851-10-17
thirdly, it may state with precision the issue of We
racity which il means 10 make"
And with affao.ol l;r,,;t,r n oddc-

thirdly, it may state with precision the issue Of We
racity which il means to make"
And with affected dignity 1t adds:
$50 much for the point of verscity, which we
leave for the present. with the remark that the Re
public has in that matter made charge against US
which 10 must either retract else state with pre-
cisson, and then PROVE STATED or it will find itself
placed by US in position before the public which
not even vanity itself can deny to be Illuminating"
Now for the proofs which shall be as brief
and pointed as possible.
On the 9th instant the Union made this re-
mark in the course of a long article on alleged
sympathy between President FILLMORE and
the British and French"
| "Among the evidences of this deplorable proch-
witty, not the least in significance is the fact that
long article in the London Iimes-of which the
above is an extract-should be copied into the or
gan Of this Administration yesterday without
word of dissent"
| Still further on IT. said
| SIN this spirit it will be that the organs of
| this Wing Administration are harmonizing won
derfully with the London Times when they say
that Cuba must never, under any contingency, be
annexed to the United States-that it is lawful to
intervene to prevent, but not to put down revolu
1
on the part of France or England to disturb the
peace and tranquility of the United States"
| These imputations were in perfect keeping
with the spirit of other articles, prior and sub
| sequent; and on them we base the first part
of the charge-namely, that "the Union has
again and again asserted that we gave tacit
approval to the statements and recommended
tons of the foreign press as to the interven-
ton of France and England in the affairs of
Spain" Yet of this portion of the charge the
Union says it is untrue as stated" Let the
reader Judge between us.
On the 10th eve proved by a quotation of
passages that we had uniformly, and from the
first, deprecated every thing like informed
ding as between this country and another"
The Union of the lth appeared without any
reply whatever to our citations and to the OBJ
servations suggested by them; but repeated its
ALLEGATION as though we had paid no attention
to it. Here are the Union's words on the / It'll:
"They Ii. e. hteIHgencer and Republicl both re-
ceved into their columns without comment ac-
counts of treaty of intervention entered into by
France and England"
''But the Republic--that one Of the organs of the
Administration which claims that it is always
ready TO exclude the conclusion that it is the organ
of any body-suddenly came out on Thursday last
and, affecting to reproach the Washington Union
for its violence and injustice declared that such
treaty of guarantee that referred to would never
be tolerated by the United States"
On the 18th we said:
"The Union of Saturday repeats its assertion that
we received into our columns without comment
accounts of alleged Intervention by European pow
ers between Spain and the United States, and that
we did not deprecate such Intervention until Thurs
day last. We have already distinctly declared
that this statement is contrary to the truth, and
again point to file in proof of the declaration
These passages substantiate two of ''the last
three sentences" which the Union ventures
to pronounce ''untrue as stated" Will it per
sist in saying so?
Our further charge is that the Union evaded
this challenge, and sought to "hide its falsity
by paltry equivocatlon;" and we now quote the
principal portions of the paragraph which we
had thus characterized:
''The remark of the Union was, that one of the
organs Of the Administration, Thursday last
had come to the conclusion that such a treaty OF
States This was the first intimaton that looked
like an avownl that the Administration is awar,
that there was such thing act to perform in
repeng the aggrcssions of foreign powers"
GAS to the shiVy shally generalities previously
found in the Republic-saying that the President
would take care of our dignity and protect our
tonal obligations, at the very moment that it waf
known the British and French fleets were on the
coast of Cuba, authorized by the President to trea
the followers of Lopez as pirates nobody regarded
them as any thing more than vain palliations ofn1
irretrevabe blunder."
! We think that these passages are really and
truly an evasion of the question: piece O
''paltry equivocauon" vastly more creditablC
to our contemporaries ingenuity than his hon
esty.
Despite Of the Unions magniloquence, then
we decline to retract the charge presented il
, our impression of Wednesday,; we dare even tt
, repeat it, and to present some of the evidence
by which it is sustained and with al
due Difference to our contemporaries gentil
, ty, and deep sense of our "want of man
f ners" in having touched too sharply its deli
cate nerves, we presume to add that the
charge is already as specific as language car
make it, and that the Union will save itsel
much trouble either by mastering manlines'
enough to plead guilty, or by meeting the accu
sation fully and fairly, instead of seeking to re
vive discussion on collateral and exploded
, issues.
Returning Reason.
We perceive that, while the editor Of thu
| | =, bie