{"newspaper_name": "The daily union.", "edition": "01", "page": "p2", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 3190, "word_count": 547, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9649999737739563], "ccnet_perplexity": [1151.300048828125], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
Since the above was put in type, we observe in
the Integenccr of this morning an article which
seems to be intended as reluctant and partial apol-
ogy TO its readers for the very extraordinary and fla
grant instance of coarseness and vugarty towards
opponent, which we quoted from that journal in the
Union of Saturday evening. We shall be glad if the
Inteligencer's future behavior in any controversies
which may arise between that journal and ourselves,
shall warrant in considering its late gross breach of
decorum as special and exceptional lapse from pro-
priety rather than as the result Of confirmed bad
habit. At any rate, we can allow somewhat for
the peculiarly pcrplexng dilemma in which the In
telligencer finds itself placed in our recent contro-
versy. ''- .''
In its article-or as perhaps we should say, its
opologyof to-day, after referring to the "frequent
good natured lance" which il was accustomed in
former times "to break" with us ("of the Rich
mond Enqurer,') and aluding to what it is now
pleased to call our ''semi-ofcial" position, the In
teigencer speaks Of its recent tlting against us as
| follows: - ..-
"This has not been to US an agreeable task, for
we have been much surprised by the striking dis
| regard Of candor displayed by the Union az we
have had occasion to be offended by its manner; nor





| agreeable; for in almost all refuaiion of a
| calumny has only been followed by repetition Of
it; and TO his bearing towards his adversares we
fear that the venerable editor has experienced that
change which the proverb tells ever attends evil
communications, or else his editorial columns oe-
casionally fall into very unworthy hands.
| However this may be, as the governmental or
gan daily teens with aspersions of the whig party
/ its principles, and measures feel constrained 10
point out its errors, its misrepresentation, and s
disngenuousness. In performing this Office, how
ever earnestly we strive to avoid it, argument will
| occasionally assume somewhat personal charac-
ter--dvested, though il be, on our side, we hope OF
oHensiveness. ... ~ ..nF ~a.. HF" #....I rg3
| "The design Of this note is to be apologize to
our readers, not only for recent passages with the
Union, but for some which may probably follow, in
nsmuch the tone Of the last number Of that print
will compel at least to to the subject Of its
misrepresentation Of reference to Mr.. Jeffer-
sons plans OF negro emancipation"


| Upon this we have only to remark:


Ist. That in the present state of the case between
US, any further ausion by the Inclligcncer to our
"misrepresentatons of it's position, has become
very specially ridiculous; and that, in view of the
lnteligencer's recent. statements concerning Mr.
Jefferson's opinions, any allusion to "caumny" is
Ito say the least Of it) touching on very delicate
ground. ntr .Y


I'd. That, with the Union of Saturday evening
before them, readers can very well Judge how
far the Intellgencer has succeeded in "diyesting'
its replies IN us Of "ofensiveness" and how far its
present amends is adequate TO its offence.


Sd. That il the IntelTigencer's repentance Of its
late cOarseness be real and its desire TO reform ain