MIR. FOLKS CABINET-A UNIT.
{"newspaper_name": "The Arkansas banner.", "edition": "01", "page": "p2", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 2153, "word_count": 385, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9575999975204468], "ccnet_perplexity": [749.4000244140625], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}


 The Washington Union is savage upon the Richmond Whig for intimating that there is no great kindness for each other among the members of Mir Folks cabinet, and that Mir. Buchanan, in particular, is the object of ieal- ously and suspicion amongst his ministerial compatriots. The Union does not say anything directly in contradiction of the fact that the cabinet is dreadlully divided, but it merely says the effort thus to ''sow the seeds of leal- ousyn is ridiculous and malignant. Perhaps 1t Is so; but 1t strikes us that 1t would be quite as much the purpose, if the official paper really wishes to deny the existence of this state of things, to do it. IL may be very malignant, and even ridiculous, in the Rich mend Whg to say anything about the dis. sensions prevailing in the executive cabinet and about the ill odor in which the Secreta- " of State finds himself among the members of Mir. Folks official household; but the statement may be very true, nevertheless, anc probable is so.-.N. l. Courier S' Enquirer October 6M

 Not one word of truth it it. What would the IN. Y. Couriern have us to do? Whal the Richmond Whig' We have so often re- lSGlGu llldt lilG Mllpl6 story dOOul QlSSeHSIOllS in the cabinet is untrue, that we consider any repetition of the report to be utterly ''rdicu- lous.n We have before said that the report of discord in the cabinet is lalse-that it was fable. Tine whole story, indeed, is too stale for repetition How can we contradict it. without appearing savage p There is but one word in the language strong enough to express the mendacity of the assertion; but that word is rather too coarse for ''ears po- lite.o Ii we were 10 begin with that species of nomenclature, we should be constantly il the habit of using the word; for never have we seen so many ialsehoods as are propagaied by the Washington scribblers and the whig editors. Let us then say, once for all, that there are no "dissensions m the Executive cabinet'-there is not one of the Secretaries who is in s.ill odorn with his colleagues and surely il Is not the worthy and amiable Secretary whose name is thus rudely thrust upon the country Union.