Enr Lhe Renipi.
{"character_count": 1334, "word_count": 240, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9664000272750854], "ccnet_perplexity": [1062.0], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
TOT the hegiNer.

 MR. EDIToR:-In your notce of the election on Friday, you have done injustice to the democratic party, by rendering than justice to osr olpo- nents To what extent unfair practices were resolf- ed 10, cannot say; but this know, q speak adv;- ssedly every effort made, not only to bring the field the entire whig vote, but also 10 get votes in the polls than there are whig votes. And this done, in cases, by tickets printed on paper exactly like those used by the democratic party Of course, do mt attribute any blame in this matter to the inspectors of the election But the,e in all parties who without scruples of any kind len desired purpose is to be at taned.

 Suspicion uled in our. party. under the i'm presson at the little interest felt by the citizens in the CANVASS, would insure at least safety froia fraud and artifice. But it appears that this calm was taken advantage of as l have stated accuse no man, and not fully informed how far these frauds were carried. JUSTITIA. In alluding to the fairness ofthe whgs, we did not assert anything positively. We merely spoke of what came within the sphere of our observation. If our correspondent be correct of course we are entitled to the privilege of withdrawing our praise. As Sir Peter TeazIe says, "this is d--d bad world and the fewer praise the better.'