For the .4rhanSas Banner.
{"character_count": 4163, "word_count": 747, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9814000129699707], "ccnet_perplexity": [767.2999877929688], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
WASHINGTON, HAMPSTEAD CO., ARK.

 June 9th, 1S44.

 The editor of the Telegraph has for seve- ral days been in the most agonizing labor, and l anticipated his delivery of something that would astonish the people of Arkansas; but this time the mountain has labored and brought forth only a mouse. To come more directly to the point, this astute gentleman has again directed his editorial thunders at "Brutus," to the great alarm of several indi- viduals, for the safety of the latter; but am happy to be able to inform them that he is not yet annlhllated, nor is there the least probability that he will be by such editorial storms. The editor in his reply to ':Brutus,'' displays an amount of stupidity which but little expected to find in him, and would ad- monish him that if he does not wish to stultify himself, and lose his reputation for saneness of mind, not again to attempt to excuIpate himself upon the same ground that he has assumed in his editorial. From symptoms in yesterdays Telegraph, I should judge the editor had become somewhat rabid since the speaking on the 1st inst. If he has, as old Shakespeare says, |" Madness in great ones should not unwatched go."

 He says placed wrong construction up on his. article, and all that said in reference to 1t was like Ca dog barking up the wrong tree.o Well, it may be possible, that l misconstrued his article. l am of opinion that any one of common sense would have given it the same construction that did. But whether did or did not rightly construe his article, is now to me matter of indi1er- ence, and l shall not trouble myself to clear up this point. But as the editors assertion that l misconstrued his article Is all that he says in vindication of himself, he seems to call in question the correctness of my iudg- ment. Now can assure the editor that al- though l cannot boast of any extraordinary intellectual endowments, nor of any great a. mount of erudition, I fatter myself that can understand almost any common newspaper paragraph written with any degree of perspi- cuity and that even his editorials do not evince such depth of thought as to be be- yond my comprehension. There were, how ever, two sentences in the editors first article, relative to 'sBrutus," upon which was du- bious about placing construction, for fear 1t would be an erroneous one. In speaking of MT. Pike's speech hea says-"We might have spoken of Mr. Pike's speech, and except portion not fully explained, in terms, too, of the highest praise.@ But we know that it was expected we should be.enthusiastic in it's praise, and as Mir. P. had no previous notice, and the night was cold and dsagreeable, and the attendance thin, we concluded to say nothing about it." Quite lucid and unambi- guous! Now will ask any one with com mon judgment and discrimination if he can ascertain the editors opinion of the speech by reading these two sentences? If he can, 1 will confess that his penetration is more acute than mine. The editor says he might have spoken of the speech in terms of the highest praise. Yes hemght, iaconsistently, have done so; but he might, with more truth aud iustness, have spoken of 1t in terms of disapprobation. But what are we to think of the first clause of the next sentence2 It reads-ssBut we know that 1t was expected we should be enthusiastic in its praise,o Sc, and therefore he thought if best not to Say anything about it. lshoud like to know the right construction to be placed upon thatsen tence. Would the editor have us to under stand that if he had spoken of the speech in such terms of praise as it deserved he would have shocked MT. Pike's modesty, which he dIG not WISH to do! or tllsil, II le Iidu eulO- gized the speech in such manner as fl was expected he wouldit would have been the sac rifice of truth and consistency l would ad- wise the editor,if he wishes always to be distinctly understood, to write with little more perspicuity, and never to throw the cloud of ambiguity over his sentences. Probably he writes some of his editorials in such a manner that if necessary, he canact like the Irishman's hea-that is, whenyou place your finger upon him heis not there; or to