{"newspaper_name": "The Litchfield County post.", "edition": "01", "page": "p3", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 3375, "word_count": 594, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9686999917030334], "ccnet_perplexity": [936.7999877929688], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
Palty" and tha; the definition of the word Republi- can is very different from the they had learnt from their fathers of revolutionary memory,-ihat instead off saying, Ia friend government without archy ;-One who wishes place the government m the hands of the people," it says " member of ous party-a supporter of our measures; ;-that the tern federalist-instcad of signifying tone who desires that the independent gHtes of this country may be eagued together for their natural and general good

 that each state shall have the right of governing it's own internal affairs, while it shall submit those reg ulatons which delegation of all the states shall judge best for the interests of the whole ;"-accOrding to the nomenclature in question, is supposed to be an " enemy to Party" which by most natural con- clusion signifies 'an enemy his country "a friend to other" The work has also been found to be strangely inconsistent since it gives long list oi names and has also the magic power ofmaking inser- tions and erasures at pleasure. To each of these names is attached in large characerSthe words, 'Our Party" or '' Our enemy" Scarcely a name, howev- CT, can be found, of those most in vogue, which has not from two to four, and six or eight sures and interlineaons; and that too without the least change in the political character of the indivdu- Out CdpTlCe or the tlneS. noSe erasures, although intended to be complete obera- tions, can be traced out with common magnier and will always be found to be the same alternate words, " Our Party" |" Our Enemy" Now whether the of the Hon. Moves Barber has ever been treated in this manner,we have the means at hand of knowing for as we before remarked, we do no, keep the work Tn question upon our desk, although often reviled for not doing, We shall however re- quire better authority than the editor of the Register that has not been. since what he asserts IS but bare repetition of the discarded authority.

 Our readers we trust will excuse us for thus wan dering fromthe subject in question: fou at Moves Barber, Esq" We never supposed this gentleman to possess any thing than common abities-his re- pub!icanism never doubted, and his being a gen. tieman we never questioned. We however consider ed his vote for Mir. Stevenson an outrage upon the strong evidence that there is "dough' somewhere, whether in his face, in his head, do not say.- He well knew, several months since, that the decree had gone forth from Richmond that Jackson anti tariff man nuSt be Speaker-tha several of the mos; important committees ofhe House must be of the Vir- ginia anti-tarif stamp; and he we'll knew that the freemen of Connecticut were not such dish of skim. med milk wish that of their delegates should lend his aid in bringing about these measures,--and that if he stands on an eminence too high present for just application ofthe word down." he will moi stand many years, unless indeed he is exalted to the Senate reward for his treachery.

 is tut fair remark that the editor ofthe Regis.

 ter guesses that Mr. Barber did not vote for Mir. Ste venson. We, however, guess he did f; and We must

 therefore both wait for higher authority decide the question: By the way, was it it not Mir. Barber who told friend Wells months since that the story of Mir. Adams and Mir. Websters bargaining was true! We only ask for information.