{"character_count": 1223, "word_count": 220, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9681000113487244], "ccnet_perplexity": [1575.800048828125], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
~ The Journal u Commerce insists that the
Iocos .ook ground for Free TRADE Gas that paper
understands it) in the Connecticut Election, and
did very ell under that banner. Ifthey are sails
fled with the result, we of course should be; but
there is not an intelligent Loco-Foco in Connec
ticut who will not cheerlully admit that their real
or oHedged hostility to the TarD ooas the cause
of their defeat--that but for this issue CfeDeland
mould hare been reelected. We have already
shown that they tried to cvade or be-littlc the
Tariff issue cited evidence that Van Buren Is
as much for Protection as Clay, &c. &c. 1t is
true, as the Journal says, that their leading pa
pcrs did occasionally admit themselves favorable
to McKay's bill, but they kept the provisions of
that bill out of sight, and vocilerously declared
that il afforded as much Protection as Mr. Clay
is in favor of! Says one of their speakers, Mr.
Hickok of Danbury, at Ridgetield, 4 Mr.. Van
Buren, and Mr.. Clay agree precisely on the Tariff
question, and thank God that is the only ques-
ton they do agree upon" But we need not,
surely, pile up evidence of a fact, so palpabe as
that the Locos of Connecticut, skulkcd the Tariff


ssne as far as possible.