MOBILE.

Wednesday Morning, December 2, IsIe.
{"newspaper_name": "Mobile register and journal.", "edition": "01", "page": "p2", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 5091, "word_count": 896, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9519000053405762], "ccnet_perplexity": [969.4000244140625], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
The eastern mails came through yesterday, but a good many of our exchanges are missing. Our la- test date from Washington is Tuesday, the 24th, from New York the evening of the 23d Several days later are due.

 The Union of the evening of the 23d gives a large portion of it's columns 10 further official despatchts from the array. The letters published are those of Gems. Worth and Twigs, of the regular army, and Gen Henderson of Texas.

 That of Gen. Worth deserves that we should find room for it in full which We shall eudeayor to do in Il day or two.

 The official dcspatches from Gen. Wool were pro- missed to be published in the Union oflhe 25th, but that paper has not reached us.

 The Southern Quarterly Review for October con tans two articles on the subject of internal improve ments, of which the te xts are the Memphis con venton and the report of MT. Calhoun thereon, i'll the Senate of the United States Tine South Caro- linan at Columbia, attributes the first in order (Art Gin the Review) entitled the Memphis conven- tion to the pen of R. Barnwel Rhett and the second (Art of the Reyew) loD D. J. McCord, Esq.

 These are both men of rare talent and high stand ing and both of the strict state rights school of po tcs Yet on this question they differ widely with each other, and neither supports Mr. Calhoun to the extent of his positions. MT. Rhett argues with an evident desire to susta MT. Calhoun in his concos- sions to the internal improvement policy; and ap- pears 10 favor ii as an expedient compromise, with out considering the constitutional point. He dis sents, however, from MT. Cahoun's discovery of a con sttutona limitation upon the power as he de- fines it. Ihe argument by which Mir. Calhoun found gSheral and exclusive power in Congress 10 improve all the rivers in the Unon, and the right of two States by compact, 10 exercise part of the power an exception, out ofthe general grant, Is considered by Mr. Rhett as fanciful, and treated as a "hyper criticism dangerous when dealing with constitutional questions" Mir Rhett, therefore in assentng 10 the proposed compromise of principle, is constrained to reject all the limitations which MT. Calhoun found for the cesslon. Indeed, through out the article, there is but faint support of Mr. Cal. houns argument, and only general concurrence with the measures he proposed, on grounds prlnc. pally of political expediency.

 Mr. McCord on the other hand opposes the whole doctrine of the report, and the whole plea for com

 

 ples, and surrender of all limitations by the stitution, on tho power of appropriation by Con- gress. In the course of this article he quotes with a great deal of point part of the speech of MT Rhett, delivered at the last session of Congress wherein that gentleman very ably and thorough, examined the question of the claim of the westerl rivers 10 peculiar favor from the government, ant decided expressly az eainst the analogies which MT Calhoun finds; and the policy which, under new view of partes he now appears to favor.

 Mir Rhetts leading idea is, that if the friends 0 the improvement of the great western rivers can b. separated from those who are friendly to mere oca improvements, as for harbors and improvements 1T one or two States, the combination of interests may be defeated and the progress of thesysem arrested He supposes that if the staes-rlghts men will Sot or the western river Improvements, the friends O those measures may vote with the south to defea all others and he seems to be willing with MT. Cal houn that the compromise should be offered.

 The discussion of these matters will doubtless oc cupy a good deal of space among the democratic pa pers of the south, with whom heretofore the con sttuton has been held as the only safe barrier behn which the opponents of the system could entrencl themselves. The proposition from such hi gh guar ters to abandon that ground, and seek for othe means by sacrificing part of our principles 10 SC cure local support, and without any guaranty o even knowledge of the new line upon which the al lies we desire will agree to stand with us hcreafle against their own present friends, is likely to agtat the whole body of the democratic party, and drav a lne among them s,incily between the party o expediency and the party of principle.

 We know no more signal example of the dlfiicul ties which are met in entering into such combina lions as MT. Rhett and Mir. Calhoun propose, thai was exhibited tthe very last session of Congress immediately after MT. Calhoun made his report, il which he comedies the power of improvement owe rivers running through more than two States, 'bt not 10 these whose napigabie waters embrace pittin one, or at }ariheSt, ttoo States"

 Nevertheless, by referring to the Congresslona Globe page 1884, it will be that the pas sag of a "b to provide for the improvement of the na vgaton of the Ohio, Mississippi Missouri and Ar kansas," MT. Calhoun himself voted in the afr maive, although the Arkansas river throughou its whole nayigable extent runs within the State o Arkansas.