GEN. ALFREDTDooKERY,
{"newspaper_name": "The North-Carolina standard.", "edition": "01", "page": "p3", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 4491, "word_count": 775, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9729999899864197], "ccnet_perplexity": [1466.5999755859375], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}



GEN. AEFREDIDO0KER


Or The man, according To- has oon desqgFPsioa


greg! frwness IF 2ErYosq e"d strength efzs'f


felIeekn',,., ,-;.aa,,.' '',,s,,.,a,,g II


The noloricty acquired by 7this gentleman as an
whig partzan, and by his insulting
and overbearing course during the exciting scenes
which marked ahe Organization of the Senate of
North Carofina at its last session, joined 10 bis
oEerweening personal vanity, very Justly exposes
him to the cehsutes of the denocratic press. It
has been charged by one Of our correspondents
that? during the late session, Gen. Dockery wrote
nm article for The Independent laudatory of him.
SELF This ehargeshas. beenqprOmpsly and 7stubs
borniv denied by his friends and whether the
matter itself be of sufficient Importance to justify
,b,s article, it is at least due from US to our very
respectable correspondent especially as we have
all the facts at hand, to set them forth, and letthe
people Judge for themselves. - as ..#r 20


Now lei US, with all becoming solcmnity, go
into the facts, and see how they stand. Firstlg
In the correspondence between Col. Wheeler and
Gen Dockery, the originals of which are in our
nossession, the former calls upon the latter to
know whether ''the article in,question had been
furnished" by him. la reply Gen. Dockery al
ludcs to certain charges preferred in said article
against Col Wheeler, and says he "conceiVes"
he wa: fully justified in saying all he did in
the article" To this Col. Wheeler replies, and
says in the article, &c. q0rittsn By yoursezf'-
10 which the General made no ams1Oer. This is
pr00f number one. Secondly: The Fayetteville
Observer denies cmphatcally and in the broadest
terms, that General Dockery wrote the article in
question, and brings forward correspondent
who says Gen Dockery did not write one word
of the article referred TO-" but that he, the cores
pondent, wrote it himself This is, ,eOutf@dictiOn
number one. Thirdly: The Independent goes
into the matter, and. by way of bringing the facts
to light, makes the whole subject as dark as pos
sibIe He says "Gen. DOckery furnished Mr..
SLringer aeiM some minutes affecting The charac-
ter of Col Wheeler "-the same article. Here
is proof number two. He says further, that when
the matter was in type he read it over, and direct
ed "several paragraphs to be taken oHt ;" but we
do not hear that he directed any thing to be put
in-so the puff was neither taken out nor put in
By the Independent The independent also says
The article was in the handwriting OF the Re-
porter" and, on the contrary, the Observers cor
respondent says he thinks the communication
"was sealed" when taken from his hands This
is contradiction number lwo But after ALL the
Independent comes farly down upon his knuckle-
bones and says, he does not "llnow that General
Dockery did write the words above quoted,
['groat frmness of purpose and strength of intel
lect.'l and cannot say that he did mol" This is a
b"anliful mixture of Ibid and didn't, and de-
serves 10 be styled dnrkness risiJle. ...


Hrrc. then, we have it, Grn Dockery admits
over his own signature, that he wrote the article
in QUESTION The Observer, who is presumed to
know more about il than The General does, denies
that the said General wrote any such thing and
produces a correspondent, who says he wrote it
Mr. Loring, who published The article, says Gen
Dockery furnished his Reporter with " some min
utes;" :" that he the Editor, took out several para
graphs, but put none in; and finally he says he
does not know whether the General pufed him
self or not


We have stated the facts, and now leave the
constituents Of Gen. Dockery to draw their own
conclusions If the General did Aot puff himself,
and the negative can be ascertaincd, somebody
ought to make him an apology; but if he did,
why then we think he ought to be run for Con-
gress, in the Richmond District Wherefore
why, good sir, look at the advantages of having
such candidate. The whig Editors might alb
solutely lie upon their oars Puhs could travel
from Richmond, or from any point at which the
Genera! might touch, to Raleigh, to Fayetteville,
and to Greensborough, until the whole District
kindIed, and gowed, and flashed with the praises
6fthe whig candidate. But enough ofthis. We
leave the General, not exactly


Sc Leaning detected on his club of conquest
but 10 his repose upon his own /" Grmness- pur-
pose and strength Of INTELLECT"


"THE CULTIvATOR."


We are indebted to Mr. Mather, of this City,