{"character_count": 1703, "word_count": 291, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9743000268936157], "ccnet_perplexity": [1439.5], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
Judge Crartord and the Tuscaloosa Inquirer- When we first saw the communication of a Citizen, published in late number of the Inquirer charging the Hon. WILLIAM CRAWFORD with gross miscon- duct in interfering in the State Elections, and read the remarks upon the publication by the Editor of that paper, felt confident from our knowledge of the individual implicated that the whole was either falsehood, or great perverson exaggeration of the truth. We were strengthened in this opinion by the manner in which the subject was treated in the Inteligencer. The Editor ofthe Inquirer, however, having persisted in his assertions of misconduct, it became the duty ofevery man, and more especially of every Editor of public press, to investigate the subject and to ascertain and set before the world the truth of the transaction. One of the highest func- tions of independent press is to shield the inno- cent, as well as to expose the guilty and to the task is pleasant believe it to be important. In this view of our duties we have taken occasion to inform ourselves fully of the whole transaction charged upon Judge Crawford as official misconduct and now submit it to the impartial decision of the public. We are not disposed to shield any one i'm properly; neither can bring ourselves to join in injuring any man by means of detracton and false hood.

 On the morning of the election, and before the judges took their seats, Samuel Hitchcock, resident of Mobile, and personal friend of Judge Crawford, asked him whether he, MT H., had right to vote at St. Stephens for member of Congress and Governor. The Judge replied that he did not think that he had right, inasmuch as ths Constitution declares that