American telegraph. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1851-1851, 1851-05-07
AMERICAN TELEGRAPH
THE BULWER AFFAIR, AGAIN.
SOME CIVIL WORDS TO COWS" ..
WASHINGTON, MAY 6, 1861.

WASHINGTON, May 6, 1861.
TO The Editors Of the american Telegraph. @
eGESTLEmEN In your paper of this afternoon s
date there appears communication, over the
signature of "Civis," purporting to be reply
to one which addressed to you on Saturday
last, and which appeared in the Telegraph of
Monday, relative to the late speech Of Mr..
Bulwer. ' '..
Your correspondent begins by saying that my
communication sis quite too bad to be passed
over in silence feel confident that 4 shall
prove his to be orse land that with little efort)
before am done with it,
"Civis" says his principal object in writing
is to call attention to what Sir Henry really did
say; yet he really does not cite a single word Of
The offensive passage IN Me speech alluded to-, He
declared this to be his object, too, in order "to
give the quietus to the BLUNDERs of people
whose passions and violence have run away
with their powers of Judgment" yet in the
next breath he says, ''Sir Henry Bulwer took
the occasion offered by his address to give
PUBLIC DENIAL TO THE FORGERY committed by
the editor of the Boston sCeu.'" This is truly
blundering admission for the denial of the forgery
of the despatch is an assertion of it's authen-
ticity which might well proceed from the editor
of the "Celt, but, coming from the apoogst
of the Saxon official, is specimen of dwelling
which stupidity itself, in its happiest moments
of laundering, could hardly aspire to equal. 1t
might, indeed, be called an t'Irish Bull" if
it were spiced with the characteristic wit of
that people; but obviously destitute Of all point
as it is, and dull as John Bull himself, or even
as your correspondent, it may more appropri-
ately be called an English Ok.
Your correspondent further says that Bull
wer's remarks were Corrected to the Boston
editor alone" This assertion is palpably un-
true. Those remarks were general in their
terms The extract from Bulwer's speech, quo
ted in my first communication, is conclusive on
this point; and would not commend the spirit
of any Irishman who could read it without
feeling and expressing indignation.
"Civis" asks, "How can anybody, not can
didate for lunatic asylum, understand that
living Scots, &c., descendants of the ancient
Celts, were pointed at by Sir Henry?" 1t might
be more pertinently inquired, how any one,
who had read the offensive extract, and asked
such question, could have escaped being an
inmate of mad-house.
Your correspondent also says that the late
indignation meeting was "got-up humbug."
There was no humbug about it; it was what
it purported to bean indignation meeting Of
a portion of the population OF the city of New
York, who felt outraged by the unprcyoked in
suit cast upon them by q British ,functionary
and who expressed their resentment with the
fearlessness of men protected by the American
flag. 1t is true some uncivil language was used
on the occasion, but none that could exceed the
rude ribaldry and low inyective that disgraced
the speech of Englands Minister.
With an apparent air of triumph your cor
respondent asks, What return foreigners make
for the protection of American law :? can an
swer for Irishmen, that they make that return
which America expects Of them, and which, as
an American am proud to say, a vast majority
of the American people acknowledge. They
obey American law; they cherish a most de-
voted attachment to American institutions
they enrich our country by their industry and
skill and they are ever ready to expend their
blood and treasure in defence Of the American
fag That is the return they make. Does
"Civis" think it enough? Thank Heaven,
American republicans at least think it is.
"Civis" says that Americans are descendants
of all sorts of people-of Saxons, Danes, Celts,
&c." But the naughty Briton, whose apologist
he has become, lately asserted that we are An.
glo-Sa1ons, and that our industry, our energy
our unexampled increase in wealth and popula
ton, our victories on field and 1ood and tn,
consequent glory we have acquired among tn,
nations, are to be traced to the Saxon stool
from which he says we are descended. On thii
point Civis" and the British Minister widely
differ, and leave them to settle the contro
yersy-only remarking that | fear, from the
little talent displayed by the former in his COM
munication of to-day, the latter, even with q
bad cause, will gain an easy victory
"Civis" winds up his diatribe of bad gram
mar and worse logic by rendering unasked ad.
vice to Irishmen in America. They need nc
advice from such q source. They know their
duties as well as their rights as American citi.
zens; and while they conscientiously perform
the first, they will firmly maintain the latter.
Having thus analyzed the communication OF
"Civis," and shown the stuff of which it is
made, commend him to the especial care of
his friend, the British official.
Respectfully, F. Men.