{"character_count": 1704, "word_count": 316, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9763000011444092], "ccnet_perplexity": [2195.300048828125], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
We have been much amused for several weeks past at the great pains which the Inquirer takes to get an impression abroad that Mir Lewis is nulif- CT, and that when he gets to Washington this win ter he will be prepared go the ,ohole hog with the South Carolina nues. The principal ground of this charge is predicated upon the fact that the Charleston Mercury boasted of the election of MT Lewis as a triumph of the doctrine of nuifcation in the Southern District of this State. We cannot pretend to say what Mir Lewis feelings are on this subject or to what lengths he would go to obtain repeal of the tariff uct; but this much we can say, that none ofhs acts either an individual or as Re- presentatve in Congress- have been ofa character to weaken him in the public estimation, or to fix upon him the heresy of nulli6cation And as an evidence of this, we will simply remind the Inquirer of the large majority of votes he obtained over his worthy competitor. The Inquirer surely will not say his supporters are nufers or that the doctrine is view shall wait for stronger proof than the assertion of the Editor of the Inquirer before we condemn MT Lewis. This modest and unaSsuning editor has also pronounced the election of MT Lewis as one of the greatest curses that could have beallen Alabama Now we have notion that MT l.. even if he were so disposed, could injure to an amount to justify this sweeping denunciation. Were it not that the Editor of the Inquirer is governed solely by pLE and is too patriotic and disinerested to be nfu enced by MEN, should say that his unsparing cuts at MT Lewis are owing to his skepticsm in the or thodoxy of the Inquirer and the infability of some of its leaders. .