New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1843-03-20
THE TRIBU NE.
Capital Punishment.

had supposed that The discussion on the sub
,c, of Capital Punishment had closed 1t seems,
ii,oweyer, that those who hold the affirmative are
20, vet disposed to let the matter rest, This is
Inferred from your short yet controversial review
Mr.. Cheeyer's late argument, from certain que
re, Of Equity, with reply thereto in last Fri
I@Jsys Tribune, and from communication signed
NO Hangman, in Saturdays paper. No one,
Mr. Editor, could complain of the course you have
bsretofore taken in this matter. You have uni
nmly done your opponents justice, conceded the
hrce of their arguments, and treated them person
4 by with respect. The same spirit is maintained
aha late review to which refer, with the ex-
option that YOU assume tina, your own is the
| Christian and humane, and, of course, that the
cher is the unchrstan and inhuman side of the
| aigument. This might pass unnoticed as allowa-
BE in brief statement of positions, were it not
/ br the fact that great pains have been taken to
vrduce this impression III other quarters, and by
ibis means 10 create upjus. prejudice against
| ,bscierical gentlemen who advocated the mega
| i've During the discussion, it was several times
| snnounced in some OF our papers that Mr.. O. Sui
| Essn would advocate the humane side of the ques-
| lion, and that the relic Of Jar6arism which dis
| srced our statute-book would be defended by the
| Rev. George B. Cheever." There was not want
Ing now and then sheer at theological authorities
as opposed to the more enlightened argument
"frsm reason and expediency" The stale With
| cisn was occasionally heard "of the clergy form
| ing body-guard around TIE gallows - and evil
dent efforts were put forth to excite that most
liberal, and, in this country, most contemplate of
preiudces, which may be styled /" priest hatred"
e prejudice which appeals to some of the lowest
and worst feelings OF our nature, and which finds
SO ready sympathy with the inGdel and semi-in-
fdel portion of our population.
Now We say, there is no installing the feeling
and the source whence it flows. The cant of
csstan class Of men bctrays them whatever, dis
guises Of humanity, of superior Christianity may
be assumed. Viewing the clergy merely as re-
.pecabe portion of our fellow citizens, the nsin-
uations thrown out respecting them were most I'M
generous, and especially so when we consider the
relation of two distinguished clerical gentlemen to
The public controversy which has been carried on.
They had been challenged, and have no doubt
reluctantly induced to assume position before the
public which entitled them to great respect froH,
their opponents. The latter had FIR some time pre-
yously occupied the ground almost alone. They
had manufactured their public sentiment; had been
lure, and had assumed that in this enlightened
age no serious opposition would or could be made
10 their favorite measure. 1t required no little
courage under such circumstances to take the neg
alive of question which was assumed to have been
alresdy decided Unpopular opinion ardifc spirit Of
the age. What interest have the clergy OF our
land in advocating barbarous and unchfistian law
II they are as body, conservative In their princl'
PIES instead of this being made matter OF re-
prcach, it should lead every serious and thinking
hind to suspect that there must be something Nm
sound and dangerous in that radicalism to winch
50 respectable, 50 well informed, moral and 50
dsinterested class of our citizens are, with so
lew exceptions, opposed. Were they'the depend
an. pensioners of an arlstocratlc establishment
the case might assume different aspect but IN
this land-of all the senseess cries with when
demesogues nave sought 10 make TOOLS OF those
whom they profess 10 worship: nothing can be more
stupid and rnalevolent than the cant about priest
cIstt and the improper influence of the clergy 1t
is matter of rejoicing, Mr.. Editor That the c!erl-
chi gentlemen consented to take part in that dis
custom One good effect has been to convince
those who are mere politicians and nothing else,
that there are other classes of men beside them
selves capable of discussing questions relating to
the true sanctions of Law and the true nature OF
Government; that there are men whom their closets
entertain far more profound views on these subjects
than are exhibited the superficial pages OF De-
mocratic Reviews, or the frothy defamation OF
Legislative Reports.
With respect to the public discussion at the
Tabernacle, have heard but one opinion expressed
In almost all similar controversies, the usual result
is that both sides claim the victory. The present
case, however, so far as the argument between
Mr.. Cheever and Mr.. O'Sullivan was concerned,
furnishes remarkable exception. Both trends
and foes almost unanimously concur In the opln-
ion that the latter gentleman suffered most sig
nal aud overwhelming defeat Alter repeated
challenges, he found himself borne down and his
arguments scattered to the winds by one whom ne
probably regarded as furnished only with a few
cid texts of Scripture, which could be most easily
,efuied or explained. Whatever may be the IN
ninsic merits of the question: MIR. OSuliivan was
certainly defeated discomhte9, or, as the Poiiti'
clans say, routed, horse, foot and Dragons ana
the das,ard)y article in late Democratic neVie"'
whicibears the marks of having proceededlfol. SIS
pen IS evidence of the fact. 1hat article Justhes
the language we have used. Had nc seen nj
,nodesty 10 retire from the conflict ana conteRteo
himself with weak excuses about bis want OF pre-
para,ion, CATER having made legislative reports
add been the chief agitator OF tbe s"pJce1 ioi wv
years. il might have been ungeneTeus 70 taoh' Inn
with bis overthrow. But when he skulks to his
corner in the Democratic Review, and from that
impene,rabs re,rea, snaps and snarls in impotent
fage against his victorious antagonist and the pro-
fession of which be is member-when he attempts
,sexc,e the odtam Meologicum by his contempt
ible slang about the Gallows and the Gospel ne
isdeserving of no commiseration from those VINO
might otherwise sympa,hise with the disapPo'ni,-
ment and modification he must have experienced.
One word with respecl to this claim OF superior
humanity. In reading the Democratic Review !.