{"newspaper_name": "The Yazoo City Whig.", "edition": "01", "page": "pNone", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 1756, "word_count": 318, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9539999961853027], "ccnet_perplexity": [1678.300048828125], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
because Britain has; or because Wes BY some
exiraneous movement, have gained or at
tempted to gain an advantage; or because
she has done so,


As TO the last, arc have no cause Of com
plant, and have, therefore. no right TO break
off the treaty. Great Brlaip has taken no
new Steps 10 our prejudice inOregon-none
which were not in our contemplation when
We began TO treat last year.


On the other hand, one branch Of our Gov
eminent has attempted TO prejudice The po-
sition of things by the passage Of law; but
It failed. And the Executive has made an
indiscTeet, but irregular and ineffective de-
claraton. But neither Of these is of conse-
quence enough TO warrant BritaiQ's stopping
the negotiation, though both must naturally
make her continue it in less just and yield
ing temper.


The second case only, then, remains ;c
be examined; and that is perfectly clear.


We are not aware that since last year
any new light has dawed upon either oul
claim or that of Britain, so strong as to fof.
bid further negotiation. But if, ncverthe
less. there be such. known 10 The public, i
must surely be known also to the neaolia,
tors, and therefore cannot fail to expedite
quiet and final settlement Of The mafte6
Have we got stronger proof Of our ri-hs
That would be very strange reason 10
wanting to break up the trail, instead o
pressing for verdict? Has Britain founc
new and decisive testimony? We fancy not
but if she has, it would be most perGdiou
and unPrincipled for US, on that account. t,
want 10 stop the cause, TO fair trail 0
which we have submitted ourselves.


We conclude that the case should 90 cor
ward TO It's peaceful and reasonable dec
sion; and we hope, as is our public du;,
that, it will, in spite all blusterers, els Z
trGnSsallanlic