Saturday, April sO,s 1914.

.. CHaPE1 HILL; April r2th, 1914.
{"character_count": 4331, "word_count": 788, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9810000061988831], "ccnet_perplexity": [1069.300048828125], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
.CHaPEL HILL; April f2th; 1874


Mr. Editor: We were somewhat surprised TO
see in the Register, an article which purported to
be an answer tothat on the Oregon question, pub
lishcd in your paper some weeks since In our
remarks on this subject, we avoided, as much as
possible, any thing which might tend to provoke
controversy for we wished not TO enter into one;
nor shall we, though we deem It but justice to
ourself to make "a few remarks on this communi-
cation in the Register. We by no means regret


that our article has been made the subject of criti-
cism; for the remarks which it. has called fofths
show the utter woHhlessness of the arguments
which can be addsced by those EFhe areot dit
fereut opinion from as or the total want of any;
for this article although it processes to be an an


swer to that published in your paper, comprises
nothing more than string Of declanasory sen
tences concerning the evils of war-7an eulogy on
the Justice aud good feeling which, oquote the
words of the writer near as we cam not having
the article before US, has always characterized the
diplomatic intercourse of Great Britain with the
United States-and Little invective against US
for what we said concerning Henry Clay, the
present idol of the whig party.


1t appears to US, Mr.. Editor, from the utter want
of sound argument in his remarks, and from his
failing to do what he promised in the beginning
viz to answer our communication, that the author
has merely seized upon this opportunity for the
purpose of appearing in print =.


"'Tis pleasant sure to see ones -Oucn in priat,


books book; although there's nothing in it"


l,r,, o1


it is unnecessary for US to repeat and defend them
but we will merely consider some of the writer's
remarks, and the justice of the praises which he
SO literally bestows upon the conduct ofEngl land
AMI of Clay He sets out, we bGlieve, with de-
nouncing as the greatest of all evils, and with
condemning US for wishing to plunge the country,
into one Now all this, which includes consid-
cradle portion of his remarks. was entirely super
fuous and uncalled for, since we are as mnch op-1
posed to rushing heedlessy into war, as he or any
one can possibly be; and we distinctly stated, in
our remarks, that we did not believe that the oc-
cupation of Oregon would involve US in war; II
was our aim to show that Great Britain is not in
a condition to go to war and that, under her pres
ent circumstances, war would be very disastrous



mined spirit, and act in such manner as to show
her that we were resolved TO maintaip our.rights1
at all hazards she would yield to us, and renounce
her imaginary claims. What we said Oh the sub
Jcct of war was this, in substance that, if we do
not soon occupy Oregon and extend to our.chi-
zens who emigrate thither, the protection of Aper
can laws, the West; on her own responsibility,
will probably, declaEe war-that the people Of this
portion of our country are not such as will tamely
submit to be oppressed by foreigners, on their own
shores-and, that the occupation of Oregon, IN
stead Of causing war, viii probably be the-yery
means of preventing one. Again, we said, in ef
feet, that it is cowardice which would prompt any
one to oppose this question account of the pro-
liability of its Involving .us in war. We predict
ed no war; but the writer, for the purpose of fill
ing out his article, has built him up q straw .nap
made him advocate war with all its ills, and
knocked him down.


But he says we must negotiate for Oregon; we
mnst not take possession until we have had little
more negotiation, Now we would like for auIy
one to show, the writer has not what need there
is for any more negotiation than we have already
had; or what is to be gained by negotiation,
Have we not proved conclusively, that we have |
right to all the territory which we claim7 No |
one, not even the writer himself the ELOQUENT de.
fender of Great Bfitain's justice, has denied our
right. Where, then, is the use of negotiation
But, there has been no negotiation. There was
one when Mr.. Rush was our,Minister to England
there was another when MIR. GaIlatn was ourl
minister In the LATTER Great Britain was oferedf
all the territory as far the fOy-ninth degree of
north latitude this tempting offer she would not
accept This shows what we will gain by nego-