The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1855-12-01

both of these opinions with care and have no hes
ton saying that they characterized by great pre-
csion accuracy in the statements of the claims and by
searching analysis of the groundson which the nerposi-
ton Of the court asked They just such opinions
as will command the approval of the legal profession and
give elevation to the for the ability learning and
industry with which it investigates the cases submitted
to it.
THE CINCINNATI ENQUIRER AND OHIO STATES
MAN.
We perceive that some of the Ohio newspapers continue
their comments upon the course Of the Washington Union
in reference John Van Buren,, especially those acting
mon the idea Of the Ohio Statesman and Cincinnati En-
qurer We have not chosen to proong controversy in
ia,ed by the two papers last named but it may
good purpose and fill out the history Of the times to state
such facts as seem have been forgotten by contem
porares The Statesman and the Enquirer have assumed
in tone of injured and indignant innocence, that the
Washington Union has attempted to read them out OF the
democratic party Those who have not observed the be-
ginning Of this discussion and have contented themselves
simply with reading the comments OF our ONO coaoorers
would suppose that the Union had commenced by taxing
issue with them upon Mr.. Van Burens speech Let us
state exactly where the stands and with TINS state
ment propose leaving the subject Almost at the mo-
men that the Washington Union took ground against John
Van Buren, for his Oswego speechand in doing this W
performed duty to the democratic party which could not
be evaded without laying ourselves open to the just charge
Of having proved the trust conded to ushe
Cincinnati Enquirer and the Ohio Statesman took ground
in favor of his speech Here it will be perceived was
conflict of opinions but whether right or wrong,
our had nothing whatever to do with the COM
mens of the newspapers alluded TO- They spoke without,
knowledge of our sentiments as did Of THEIRS that
however we might have regretted did regret that
when we denounced these doctrines almost universally
repuated by the democratic press they did not do the
same did not step out ofour way TO crcse or to con-
denim them for not eoncurrng with us. 1t was enough
for to show dissent from those doctrines when
enuncated by John Van Buren, But when the abolition
papers of Ohio that there was difference between the
sentiments of the Union aud the sentiments OF the En-
qurer and the Statesman this subject they seized the
occasion take their democratic adversares to task and
it did not surprise that our opinions were held up in
contrast with those of the democratic papers referred to-
The Enquirer and Statesman at this point however, not
content with having stated their own opinions in favor Of
Mr. Van Buren Speech undertook to justify themselves to
the people of Ohio by assang Of the Washing
ton Union in the premises 1t was only after this had
been done that considered it necessary to put ourselves
right upon the record and to show the which in
duccd speak in the FIRST place In SO doing we re-
errcd the admirable and welltimed articles in the En-
quirer in favor Of national doctrines after the October
election and especially in favor Of meeting the Kansas and
Nebraska questions
Some such explanation this is rendered necessary inas
much both the papers alluded to have made this differ
of opinion the occasion of personal comments upon the
and the conduct Of this journal We have had
but the kndet feelings for the editors OF both these pa
pers and cannot avoid expressing regret that
they should have fallen into the practice common
among their foes, of charging upon the Washington
Union disposition read others Of the democratic par
ty If we had sought the country for two papers
from which to expect prompt and manly reputation of
such doctrines have been reiterated by John Van Blu
rem should in all probability have selected the States
man and the Enquirer And because they started out up
on tack different from what might naturally have been
expected from them in reviewing Mr.. Van Burens notions,
surely il is no justification to say that have attempted
TO read them of the party by differing from them in
this particular We regarded John Van Buren, the rep
resentave of ideas which could be maintained in the
democratic party without bringing it to speedy dissolu-
ton aud spoke Of him in language Of just
We that in the act of excusing Mr.. Van Burens alb
creations the editors of the Enquirer and Statesman
would subject themselves to the charge of endorsing at
least winkng at his Buffalo freesoilism. To avoid the
force Of such charge distinctly vndicaed them from
any such suspicion and chose rather to suppose that they
had erred in following hastily their personal feelings,
either of kindness Mr.. Van Buren, of hostility
10 our surprise the very yndicaton of them from all sus-
peion Of standing the Buffalo platform of ls4s has
been perverted and distorted into nsnuaton agains,
their orthodoxy But enough of this. We have enemies
OF too much power to fight without exhaustng strength
with friends, or those who ought to be friends
We close by expressing regret that the Enqui-
rer and the Statesman did not the treachcry and
design Of John Van Buren, Them and we
still further regret that he has again announced
his determination to stand by his abolition IDEAS that they
have been prompt to repudate him they have
been ready all occasions within the last years to
repudiaie similar doctrines when upheld by other
NEW PORT REGULATIONS OF VENEZUELA
We translate the following from late LaguayrA paper
Navigation Dues. venezueia u. s..
Curry. Curry.
Tonnage every ton, custom-house