Delaware inquirer. (Wilmington, Del.) 1859-18??, 1860-03-17

TAKING HIN OFT OF HIS BnoTs.-A fellow by
the name Of Kellogg from Illinois, with more
tongue than brains, had been making false
charges against Judge Douglas in the House of
Representatives on Tuesday last. The charges
had been repeated over and over again, and
the members had become actually disguised
with the fellows twaddle Mr.. McCernand re-
piled;
ellis colleague was stark mad-not with
much learning, but with vindictive passion.
He would make himself notorious, as he was
unable to make himself famous. Like the
man who burnt the temple of Ephesus, or an
other man, John Brown, moved by such fanati-
cism his colleague had become the victim of
his own folly. What was his dilemma? He
was denounced By Greeley as not being good
Republican, but only a Wing, with a slight var
nish. Obnoxious to the Republicans and Wings,
he was still more so to the Democratic party.
In short, according to the evidence, he has
been nnfaithful to the Wings and Republicans
and stands between the two, fred at by both
as pirate. His object was to exalt himself
beyond his merits. He was in
* strange dilemma; in desperate case
To act with infamy, or quit the place.
lie would climb around the statue of Douglas,
to show himself. as the creeper around the oak
and cling TO the ship, rs the barnace, to he
carried 10 seas, otherwise beyond his reach.
He Mr.. McciefGand) would exhort him to for
bear his crusade on Douglas, who was beyond
his malice like the eagle, whose flight was in
the azure sky. His march was irresistible to
nnl triumph and no feeble effort could stay it,
Mr.. Kellogg repeats the same charges he made
months ago, with variations. That charge is
that Greeley and Douglas schemed Cor the cleo
ton of the latter TO the Senate. What if Gree
ey did offer his support? Must it follow that
Douglas should treat him with indignation +?
Such would NOT have been the conduct Of his
colleague. Had Democrat offered to vote
for his colleague he would not have refused
his vote On the contrary, he would have said
HWell done;f and, taking off his hat, made n
profound bow When the charge was origi-
nally made, it was promptly met by both Mr.
Douglas and Mr.. Greeley, and these denals are
a part of tile proceedings Of the House. His
colleague Mr.. Logan] at that time said Mr.
Kellogg could find some scribblcr against Mr.
Douglas, So ii has proved by what Mr.. KEEL
logg had read, Was ii not the prediction veri-
fed How much more honorable would it
have been for his colleague 70 withdraw the
charge? The charge is unfounded and ABSURD
Douglas and Greeley were not the men to agree
ON anything, and they regard every question
from different stand-points. One is practical
mantle other an abstractionist one a De-
mocrat--the other Red Republican Of the
sans cutoaes school, He knew something of
the contest in Illinois, The Republicans were
there arrayed against Douglas Money was
sent from abroad, as orators, with the view of
securing his defeat But he triunphed on the
strength of his principles, lie branded all
such calumnies with one general remark-tbey
came from an enemy who has been Scared
with his Damascus blade, and now smarts with
modification. Douglas triumphed, not with
the aid of Greeley and the Republican party,
but in spite of them