New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1850-07-26

vention" recently held at Syracuse, in which you
say that
rte adverssr,et Of Fee Schools bad been formally IN
ved Afd pernt ted 10 OccGpy A. murh n ss sy
Ttomp,1n al pie Nr Rsscom OF Ssnecs and NJ. ]. A
keMau,Ts Ediior II no Candle journal 10 our Guy
Itisweu known that you were member OF that
Convention and actively participated in It's proceed
iDes, and of course your statement OF the positions
assumed by he different members vii be credited
and understand your art lie has been copied into
several the papers in the State In that article
YOU have done me great injustice, and claim tnat
what ! did say should be stated truly. You were
pre- ent and heard my remarks, and claimed %
be az strong en- advocate OF the Free School
principle as any member of that Convention. II
appeared TO ne that, during the discussion OF the
first three Resolutions the great obi Of the Con
vention had been overlook ed by the several speak
ers therefore, deemed 1t importan. 70 the sue
cess Of the "principle' that the objections TO the
pre,ept lsv should be fairly and honestly met by
tie Convention. ! stated that there were several
cassts Of objections 70 the present law, and these
objections, whether true or false, should be duly
considered
In conversing with the opponents OF the law,
bed beef met with some re al and substantial oojec.
tious One " these is the inequality of tsxatlon and
mir ht see thst the "peculsr friends Of Free Schools
were wiling ard anxious TO take some Affirmative
sctcn in that Convention relative 10 these real or
! imaginary grievances. Ii is conceded by all that
| the mode of making assessments In this state
ought TO be changed, and the subjec has been di.
cuGsed by two l. Legislatures | do not refer Part
culsrly TO the School assessments but to all desi
red the passage Of resolution pedging our cordial
co0perston with the whole people OF the state In
making application to the next Legislature oy
way OF memorials or otherwise, for the purpose OF
urocuriDg such amendments as would be acce ptable
10 all / felt that unlers the Convention &C such,
should take some decided action the subject Of
amendments to the present law, that there was
great danger that the verdict OF the People az the
sprrotc ching Election would be against the ptncl'
pie Of Free echoos in order to get rid OF its onerous
provisions.
Some Of the members Of the Convention fully
agreed with me- and Mr.. Is oss-l thnk-of Hoch.
ester submitted ID me Resolution that he had
destined to present for the consideration Of the
Corve ntion, and, after il was altered TO meet my
views il was unanimously adopted.
| was a Member Of the Legislature that passed
this law and its friends clamed that if there were
defects in it, details, it could thereafter be amended
As experience should dictate for the more etfsctus
working Of the system. for one, fought go, and
voted for that bill and, so far as the principle 10
Concerned, | see no reason 10 regret my vote. The
last Legislature instead Of amending and perfect
the question 70 the people. If the Legislature had
passed bill embody iDg the propositions OF Hon
Nc Burroughs Of Orleans, have no doubt the prac'
tical operation Of the law would have gwen gene
raj satsiscti Il; but as this was not done the friends
u the principle should organize and convince the
people that while they are anxious to preserve the
ere1t feature Of the law, they are no less anxious
10 render the burden OF sustaining our Schools as
equal upon all IS possible.
The above contains the substance Of the remarks
that you referred to when you clsssed ne among
the adyersares of Free Schools and ot It's truth
refer YOU, particularly to Mr.. Cary of your City.
who was one OF the Vice President and presided
ou the lsst day Of the Conve nton.
Yours respectfully, b. THOMPSON
s9~ We cheerfully give place to the
above, and correct accordingly our impress
sions, formed on hearing MIR. Thompson,
tbet he was working in the interest Of the
adversaries Of Free Schools. His word is
decisive as to his own intentions.
Now be will permit us to add that we
don't think it becomes him, lawyer and
Legislator who helped pass the Free School
act, to talk of amendments to the present
law"-tbat is, the Free School ANYWHERE
by the Assessment Of Tazes is to be made
satisfactory. The Free School at has had
nothing to do with the Assessment laws,
which remain exactly as they have been for
many years. We, certainly, have no ohje,-
ton 10 any change in the laws governing the
Assessment Of Taxes which shall serve to
apportion the public burthens more equally,
but we protest against mixing this question
Np with the School controversy, or pledging
the friends Of Free Schools to any particular
course of action with regard to the Assess
ment laws. 1t is not our business to correct
them more than that ofothers. We shall be
glad to aid in the work, not specially as
friends of Free Schools, but as citizens. And
when man begins to tumble up the Free
School act with the Assessment laws, or in
any way to cOuntenance attacks on the for
mer based on the alleged defects in the latter,
we conclude he is either a covert enemy or
an un wise friend of Free Schools.
1t is idle, Mr.. Thompson, to talk Of so
amending our Assessment laws as to render
them, especially in connection with Free
Schools, acceptable to all" If you know
how to support the Government and the
Schools without drawing money from peO-
pies pockets therefor, we will make you
Controller at once, and have the work
done up. But so long as takes shall be ne
cessary, there will be grumbling, and the
heavier the tax the more grumbliog, of
course And the enemies Of the Free School
principle nurse and inname this spirit of
grumbling to the extent Of their ability,
and Try to make the ignorant believe thst
the Free School act is responsible for the al