New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1860-02-08
Neu Orleams 1ailu Crestent.
WEDNESDAY MORNING, FEBRUARY s, 1860.
MISREPRESENTATION.


The following paragraph appeared in the New
Orleans Delta yesterday afternoon:
The Crescent fully indorses the Squatter Sover-
eighty views and Douglasism of Mr.. Miles Taylor
ofwhch more anon-and says that his letter to Mr:
Bush enuDciates views advanced in the Crescent
months and months ago. Let us stick pin here.
We have been in some perplexity regarding its oc-
casonal outbnrsts of Southern ultralsm now 10
place neighbor on this question, and we are
gratified to know distinctly now where It stands.
There are several kinds of Misrepresentation
misrepresentation by direction, and misrepresenta-
ton by ndirection. Both are unworthy the use OF
respectable journalists; but If there is any differ
ence between them it is in favor of the former for
there is boldness about it, while with the latter,
elements entirely antagonistc to that attribute ex-
clusivey prevail.
We shall not specify to what branch of misrepre-
sentation the above paragraph fromthe Delta ieglt-
imately belongs Suffice it to say that the Delta
has misreprcsented the Crescent, and whether
knowingly or ignorantly, we care not. If igno'
rantly let it plead ignorance That will probably
be its best Justification. If knowingly, let it take
the opprobrum which attaches to the wiful mis-
representation Of a eotemporary
The Delta says that the Crescent "fttly indorses
the squatter sovereignty views and Douglasism O
Mr.. Miles Taylor" 1t then states that it has beer
4 perplexed about our Southern views, and il "nos
gratified to know distinctly where it (the Crescent
| stands"
These quotations from the paragraph given il
full above, would lead the unnformed, Oh ever
| casual reader, directly from the truth, and place
| US in false position. We never indorsed directly
or indirectly, the "squatter sovereignty" views o
| Mr.. Douglas or anybody else, and never expec
to. Nothing VIC ever wrote or published woult
| lead an honest, intelligent mind, to any such con
4 clusion. Commenting upon letter Of the Hon
| Miles Taylor, in which he intimated that Senate
Douglas was the only truly national Northern MAJ
| who could be elected to the Presidency, if nomi
mated at Charleston, we said in yesterday morn
| ing's Crescent:
4 In some respects and to very considerable ey
tent MI. Taylor enunciates views advanced in tn
Crescent months and months ago; and those view
have since undergone no material change. Now
as then, we believe Mr.. Douglas the only Norther
man who stands chance Of election, should he b
| nominated by the Charleston Convention. An
other nomination, in our belief, from the Nortl
would encounter disastrous overthrow. In tn
South Mr.. Breckenridge is, by all odds, the mos
| promising man. Do the Siidellians of Lonisan
! prefer Seward to Douglas, or q Black Republca
TO Breckinridges Let them answer. We do not
nor should any patriotic Southern voter.
Are there any E Squatter Sovereignty views 7
the foregoing? The Delta charges that there arr
We call the attention of all high-ninded men to Ii
charge itself, and to the paragraph upon which
is founded The closer the scrutiny the more al
parent will be the misrepresentation attempted I
be practiced upon us.
Every man, with modieum of candor and nte
ligence, knows the position of the Crescent IL
Southern question. II has been consistent throug
out. 1t holds now, as it held 4 months and mont
ago." that Douglas is the only Northern man wi
can defeat Seward next November; and it inf
itely prefers the great manly Ilnoisan with all h
faults, to the arch and unscrupulous Abolitionist
New York, or any other person holding to the san
abonlinable tenets. And We believe vast majo
ity Of the real people of the South concur with
in this opinion.