Nuhou, Volume I, Number 18, 25 April 1873 — The "Minister De Long" [ARTICLE]

The "Minister De Long"

•; ■ r Articlc in the Gazelle has a look of authoritj ! about it, and evidently emanates from the Foreign j Ofiice. But is not tbis'eaiious language for the | Minieter to utter in a paper edited hy H V M. | Whitney, forjner editor of the old Advertiser, j Somc rcports in our ne\vspapers regarding the, wants and \vishes of our planters &c., and eorres-1 pondence upon the subjeet of lal)or and immigra-! fcion, seem to have given Mr. De Long a \vrong ■ impression as ta the intention of our Government | upon those important subjects, and to have influ- j enced him to tender lirs resignatlon to His Majcsty, ' -■ 44 Is ifc noi; etrange that parties ahroad should got- \vrong impression regarding our planters, our coiirts' and the disposi v iion of our authoriiies when ; we realize how frcquently, recklessly and persistentlv they are misrcpresented at 'home.'*' Who ie it that hasso " frcqucntly, recklessly and | persistently misrcprcsentcd " our planters, &c.?j Who said that " our labor system was as wickcd , as ever slavcry was?" Who was it that in rcply ; to that enterprising planter, Mr. S. T. Alexander 5 ! who wrote about the dangcr of repealing the " Master and Servant Aetsaid that, " even if were so (that the sugar interest would be doomed) j will he (Mr. Alexander) elaim that a gross abuse ; of thc many should be perpetuated for the benetit of thefew ?" Ānd who in fine was it eaid, ] thafc <£ the relation of master and servant, ae it is ! . i eontraeted īn the majority of eases } entered into j by fraud and deception, and advantagc taken ōf| necessitj>, eontinued and made obligatory in thc ! very teeth of the constitutīon*, was in its ultimatc ■ eSeets killing thc lile of enterprise and (lepopufa- j ling (the italics are ours) the country as effectu-; ally as its balf brother slavery ever did ?" Who, ; we say, uttcred all this? And who has caused us perhaps to lose a reciprocity treaty ; and has ] eertainly caused a diplomafc in an important posi-! tion to serve us, to turn his back upon us? AVho i has done all this? Who, but Mr. H, M. Whit-! tiey, thc present editor of the Gazotte. \ And why is he changing his tune, hi« politics; and his principles? Why does lie eeho the old | ininistcrial attacks of the Gazettc against wliat he ; then called 4l free diseussion ?■' Why has he so , turned his eoat, and even changed his poKtieal! eomplexion that hi> old compauious in arms eaunot ,recogiiize him ? Why, oh, why? Perhaps j wlien we fiud out all about the job that put the j Government prēss ihto his hands. When we know how 'mueh he lost by wool speeulation last j year, whieh he is anxious to make up by toadying ] to Kins and Ministers. And when we know all, cj , i his relations with thc 'All Saints ring, w.e may; know why. We shall keep on enquiring till we : tind out somcthing, ,

_ . I jjgp Our Boiicnuan wants to know if jou ovcr ' heanl of Uie barbarous BordeD ? who oneo scarcd j thc redouhtahle ehampiou of thc r All . out of morc tluvn a ycarV gro\vtlfj by f mcrely Bhowing a toothpiek he kcpt undcr hie ■ \vaistcoat. This rough, thiB iuan of <4 Pikc/"j was mcrely iliustrating his notion oi a fight, and ; puUcd out thc tool to ahow to our brothcs? how he . Intcndctl to g»> m; but Iho man of peaee aud of, brotherly kindncss would not wait; but rau out' into the strcct crving; Oh, Lordy, savc me from j tliis l>ordciu ihk ru(Vain ol the bordcr, Murder* j l>ordcn ' Murdcr !" And thcre was the barbar-' ouB Borden jvißt dying wiih laughter. Bomc my.; tbat Borden did īuoan to go tbr 11. M. W, l'lwt; m.»y l»r, aU that we atv *uvc of that lie lau ui-l d llke « h\x\l valf. M > '