The miners' express. (Dubuque, Iowa) 1849-1854, 1852-09-15
Wrrklq Crprf5s.
-wEONEsDAY MoRNING, sEPr. is.
The D.v.npors Banner.

fWEONEsDAy MORNING, SEPT. Is.
The Davenport BaMmer.~
The editor of the Davenport Banner, has a
length replied to our article OF the 18th ultimo
His reply il courteous, for which, in these time
Of slang and siandsr, we thank him.
As he has not observed the rules Of con'ro
vtrsy very strictly; but has left the main sub
ject. I, experiment upon collateral issues, w
shall not occupy mack space, in attempting t
right him, upon the only two points in his ar
ticle, which present Issue between u.s. ls
He complains, that in publishing extracts from
our paper on the 18th ait., show that VT
never had sanctioned the call Of the Chrmar
Of the State Central Committee, for holding thu
lconyen,ion at Musca,ine on the 30th June, -
did not publish the following paragraph
"Whoepsr the Conuention in its 49," ~"
select, We shall contribute an acfv '"pp"'' w.
! From thu. paragraph he soncludes' that we
yer.. hound 10 forth, wisia sanction the nomna-
-. :, Mu.s~efne. Well, how does he
,h;. ,.rsult. Listen, and you snail
tnow. re assumes, what we most success
jc,u.1 approved in our article Of the 18th, name
L[that we ,oers in fanor and cordially sup
ported the call for the Convention at Muscatine
on the 30th June. Upon this hypothesis he
argues that whenever we used the word Con-
oention. in calling attention to the subject o.
our Congressional Convention, we must neces-
sarily have referred to the. Muscatine Conven
ton BY what rule Of logic can he draw this
conclusion, after we have clearly shown, BY
qu ,taiions from our columns, between he 2nu
and 25th Of June, that so far from being in IA
vor OF the Convention on the 3Dth June, We
were constantly urging upon our democratic
friends, the importance Of putting over the day
| unless the interior counties would become re-
concil-d without such pos ponement! The
facts will not Justify the editor in assuming that
We were in favor Of the Convention on the 3Oth
Of June, and certainly latitude can excuse
him in forcing the conclusion, that, in speaking
Of an event which was yet to be setiled, u~
spoke Of one which was already -seeoeo. In
other words, in speaking sfs Con ven"'H'~ Aach.
with / large pessiex'o OF the District was yet to
be detersined, we spoke Of the JMuscatine Con-
lvsntion. Did we use the word Muscatine p
| NJ. Was II not as easy and far more definite to
Se that word, if we intended so to be UNDER
lood, thanthe word Congress,onals 1t seems
. u %. Then, why force construction, which
language will not bear?
Our neighbor says. that we treated his allu-
s,on to our soant Of Judgment, eaoith contempt !"
You are right, and why did we do il: Be.
cause, from this charge, of a ,oant Of Judgment,
you figured up result against Judge Clark,
which, If we'll founded, should place Us beyond
the reach OF pardon. A result so disastrous as
you represented, whether produced from soant
Of judgment, or want of fidelity, should not,
and could MT, rescue us from universal con-
tempt and indignation. We would as soon you
should visit us with the spihet of knave, as
fool. We might be despised by society for the
one, but it could not transcend our own hatred
Of ourself, for the other.
The editor remarks, that what he has to say,
he shall say sin good nature and "above
board" We trust you will, and we will endeav-
or to follow your example.
The editor remarks as follows:
SIN regard to the maj rity for Judge CLARK
at Dubuque, we regard It, in part, as an ev
dence of his personal popularity at home, all
tn ugh We are BY no means disposed to deprive
our brothers Of single laurel TO which they
may be entitled.
The only far mode that we know Of, for test
ing the sense OF a county, is in county Conven
tion In the Convention in this county, upon
test vote, as between two tickets, where the
one was krow to be opposed to the nomna-
ton Of Judge Clark, and the other was known
to be in his favor, the vote stood as q TO IL
against CLARK If this exhibits very strong
personal popularity, we are not able to discover
it.
The editor seems to be sorely afflicted, at the
allusion we made to the United States S.na;or-
ship We did this, to rebut a very ungenerons
imputation. that The motives for our conduct
owards Judge Clark, were concealed behind
sthrone,'' and because we have been led honest
~ to adopt such conviction, from certain edi
torial articles which have appeared in that jour.
nal However, II we have erred, we cheerfully
recall that portion Of Our former article.
Trusting that, in this brief conclusion Of a
very improbable subject, we have satisfied the
editor and all others, that our course is not en-
Titled 10 that apprehension, which has been 90
hastily visited upon US, we cheerfully take leave
Of the subject.