Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1856-04-26

their trade whatever. Every dollar paid by
them into the national treasury, was legiti-
mately and properly so paid; and they have
as little right in justice, as in law, to ask the
Government to stand between them and q
visitation of Providence, as the farmers have
to demand that the Government shall refund
to them the duties they pay Indirectly on
thousand things, when Heaven sends on them
blighting season of drought, that causes
the loss Of their labor and capital invested in
crops.
60 far as the amount to be paid under this
bill, enacted, is concerned, that depends,
In great measure, on the consciences of par
ties who may present claims under it, and
those who aid in getting them up 1t abounds
in opportunities for the perpetration of heavier
" Gardinerisms" than have ever yet occurred
under the Government of the United States
The Correspondence find in the Union
this morning, the whole of the recent CORES
pondence between Senator Douglas and Col
Jas. II. Lane. The space at our command
will not permit us to publish it all to-day, so
we are compelled to lay over the crushing and
conclusive reply of the Senator to the singu-
lar letter Of Col. L. until our next issue. The
reader will find that it completely disproves
Col. LIS. idea that the Senator did him injus.
tice in what he took occasion to say in debate
concerning the affair of the presentation of the
so-called petition of the bogus Kansas Legis-
lature. On the whole, it may be written down
very important chapter in the current expo.
sure Of the arrant humbuggery of the FREQ
State" politics of Kansas. Herewith we ap-
pend the Uniem's introduction to the CORES.
pondence, the Introductory letters, and the
funny epistle Of Col. Lane, which, it will be
perceived, bear out what we have heretofore
taken occasion to say Of the affair:
The DOUGLAS AND LANE Cor REspoNDEScE
The false rumors which have been put afoat
in regard to an alleged correspondence be.
tween Col. Lano and Judge Douglas in rela-
ton to the debate on the spurious Kansas me-
mortal have induced several of Judge Doug
lass friends to ask his consent to give the cor
respondence publicity. The letters will be
found in our paper this morning; and we
risk nothing in saying that Judge Douglass
Ie'toi Piaces Noi; Lane IN worse predlca-
ment even than he was in before. We OBJ
serve by the New York Times which reached
US last night that Col Lane has published
card in that paper of yesterday, in which he
introduces his own letter to Judge Douglas,
with the exception of the concluding sentence,
but fails to accompany it with Judge Doug
lass reply He undertakes to give the points
of Judge Douglass reply, but he does it so
imperfectly that it is grossly unjust. With
out dwelling on the card of Col Lane, we
deem it due to Judge Douglas to say, upon
authority, that the statements that when
Col. Lanes letter was handed to Judge Doug.
las he "asksd until one o'clock to rsplu,
'chtch tcas granted" and that "he then
asked until four o'clock, and afterwards until
Monday, which were "cheerfully granted"
are total perversion and Misrepresentation
reply, and none was granted. When Mr..
Watson called on Saturday and delivered
Col. Lanes letter, Judge Douglas had com.
pany, and he informed Mr.. W atson that he
would be ready to reply in an hour or two,
which would be one O'Clock. Mr.. Watson said
he would be engaged for several hours, and
probably until four o'clock. Judge Douglas
then fixed four o'clock for his reply. After
his company left he read the letter, and found
that it would take more time than until four
O'Clock to make such reply as his judgment
dictated as proper. He Immediately request
ed Col. Orr to see Mr. Watson, and notify him
that his reply would be made on Monday
morning. Col. Orr, not finding Mr.. Watson,
left note for him giving the notice. These
are substantially the facts, and they show
hew grossly Col. Lane has perverted and mis-.
stated them:
House OF REPRESENTATIVE
April Is, 1856.
SIR: You will please publish the enclosed
correspondence. The letter of Judge Douglas
to Hon. G. X. Watson was delivered by me to
him on Monday last. After reading it. Mr..
Watson said to me, verbally, that he was not
aware when he delivered Col Lanes note
character, and that it was his determina alton
not to prosecute further the correspondence.
1t Is due to Mr.. Watson to say that his man.
ner and conversation in relation to this m latter
have been courteous and friendly, holding
that no rule or technicality should induce
him to do any thing that his judgment could
net approve. This met the approval Of my
own Judgment
Very respectfully, your obedient servant,
Editor Union JOSEPH LANE.
WASHINGTON CITY, April Is, 1855
DEAR SIR: 1t has been announced in the
newspapers that hostile message had been
sent to you by Col. James II. Lane, of Kansas
territory, and your course in regard to that
matter has been most grossly misrepresented
we, as friends whom you consulted, and who
advised the course which you pursued on that
occasion, request your PERMISSION to publish
the correspondence now in our hands in order
that the facts may be understood.
Very truly, your obedieLt servants,
X TooMBs, j. D. BRIaHr,
JOHN B WELLER, JAMES l.. ORR,
JOSEPH LANE.
Hon S. A DOUGLAS.
WASHINGTON, April 25, 1856.
GENTLEMEN In reply to your note of this