Pray what can “The Watch Tower” mean by saying that the balance of power would not be in the least disturbed by Russia’s taking possession of Timbuctoo. Absurd! The balance of power would be disturbed, and very seriously too, by such a proceeding. By gaining possession of Timbuctoo, Russia would gain possession of Africa; and by gaining possession of Africa, Russia would gain possession of Cape Coast Castle, the coast of Guinea, and the Cape of Good Hope; and by gaining the Cape of Good Hope, she would deprive us of the East Indies. And, pray, where would we be then? We put the question to our contemporary with solemn earnestness, and with calm composure wait for his reply.
Really, our friend “The Watch Tower” is but a so-so hand at politics. He positively should be more cautious how he speaks of matters with which he is unacquainted. The consequence of an opposite conduct is a series of the most ridiculous blunders.
“The Watch Tower” is not to be contradicted and brow-beat in this way with impunity. He gives in return
A REJOINDER
(with cool and easy settler).
In reply to certain captious remarks that appeared in yesterday’s Patagonian on our leading article of the 15th instant, we beg to say, for the information of the editor of that paper, that we did not say that Ministers were outvoted on the potato question. What we did say was, that Ministers would have been outvoted on that question had they brought it to issue. Strange that our contemporary will not read us aright.
Again, in ascribing a certain influence to a certain party, we guarded our expressions by the word “conditionally,” which, however, our contemporary, with his usual candour, has chosen to overlook, and thus entirely altered our meaning. Our contemporary concludes his tirade by asking us what we mean by saying “that the balance of power would not be in the least disturbed by Russia’s taking possession of Timbuctoo.” Now, what will our readers think when we tell them that we made no such assertion? What we said was, that the balance of power would not be disturbed by Russia’s occupying Timbuctoo, not possessing it, which difference of expression makes, we apprehend, a material difference in meaning. We supposed Russia occupying Timbuctoo as a friend, not possessing it as an enemy; and in this view of the case we repeat that the balance of power would in no ways be affected. We grant our contemporary’s conclusions, but deny his premises.
With regard to our contemporary’s sneer at our political knowledge, we would reply by calling his attention to his own blundering articles—(see his incomprehensible article on the corn-laws, his interminable article on the poor-rates, his unintelligible article on free trade and the Kamschatka loan, &c. &c. &c.) The editor of the Patagonian may rest assured that he has much to learn in the science of politics, and much, too, that we could teach him, although it is no business of ours to enlighten his ignorance.
C.
SLIGHTED LOVE,
FROM THE SPANISH, BY M.
“—And this is poor Anselmo’s grave!