New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1850-09-13
Ex2Hs
whr Pree soaeo!s are 0pposoa.

Although am Is plain farmer and constant
...dor nc The Tribune, have never yet learned
that ridicule is argument nor Fave ever keo"n
hat calling one mean, 'bAtoyed, 'smsli Hou'ed
roosssarily made him l believe, however
that ridcule ia usually resorted TO when arguments
~, wesk. aud known to be so; that the cause
,,bioa calls to its support abusive epthets, has
=. command aids far better and more reliable You
lave said vou would do 'your friends over the
INV Justice think, Mr. Editor, you are man
always ready to make good your word and 80
40 not hesitate to address to you few remarks 10
regard to the School Law, called by some Free
that is giving TO one portion Of the community the
yoser to make free with the pockets Of another por'
zion. This in substance is the view | take OF the
free School Law, There il nothing jast OF right
about IT, II offends against the whole tons and
spirit OF she Constitution. This you may well say
is a broad statement. / know it ia but atake 1t
ss my settled opinion its correctness leave To
LAWYERS and editors to determine. The grounds
upon which have formed it may be Inferred from
the following questions. Questions, AR. Editor,
which | hope YOU will do me the kindness to
answer.
Rrst.--Wap not this Law virtually made by the
People .-,-,..-ss..,...o.
amend, but to make their own Laws?
THIRD they have, is the right inherent, Or
derived from the Constitution
Fougth-H inherent, are we nos then governed
'Pfh-lf derived from the Constitution, will you
sbow me the clause thar delegates 10 them che
right ,.-,..,.. n.o.,.z
Hess only that OF electing the pereons who ara 70
administer and apply toe same And can the
People. otherwise than by Petition or Counsel,
legally influence or direct the application or effect
the abroga alton of the Law
Accommodating your own language, may n,
deed say, that l have as yet seen no Frae School
argument that did not strengthen my conviction Of
the Importance of repeating the presons Isw, aud
by an overwhelming majority. Now, Mr hdif2r
wha. do your arguments, OF as you Justly tern
them remarks, prove Whit, rather, they az
sert? Why nothing but what every goJ4 aud Ia
telligent citizen msy take pride 10 claiming ZIG
own sentiments. Yon say " The Stats requires
the education of all the children found within les
'borders-requires it, not i)r the sake OF Z ParE
,hDt of ALL ~ that " whore all educated there
twiIl inevitably be esa vice and crime, more moral
si,y and virtue than where ignorance is common:
'conse quenty, Properly, beng more safe from
'depredation, has much higher value; Nhere
is nothing new in ali this every one knows 1t.
These are general principles. YOQ may assume
them gs unquestjonod. Indeed, no one, unless he
were bateyed would pct Them forth as ii he
thoug hi they were in danger o. belnS 1teotcen, til
OF losing their control over the pubic mlad Bat
how in the name OF rIgb. reason can you cay taat
because education il essential r3qQiiEa TO tn3
good Of the State, /. e. to the welfare OF all who
compose the State; beczuse tbs tendency d prop
er and complete education ID to Iesaen crime; be.
cause Property ID more valuable IL an educated
community than in al ignorant ono; because these
things are 40, how in tho name of common aense
does il follow that l. who have ja1t no" iin'ahed
educating my own children, must pay the scaool-
bils of acme half dozen or moro children to ono
of whose fathers may be paying from SL2 10 SIS
per month for services upon my tarm the proceeds
OF which may net amount to more than $500 or
$500 per anium while also toe fathers Of others
nay possess property double nay, treble the valoe
Of nv own? Il eeems to me, Mr. Editor, that this
is the true state OF the case. l grant tae princl'
ulas you atate IN regard to the necessity ana Deno
fts OF Education but deny The Free School Law
10 be right application ofthoao principles de-
NJ it to be any application Of them except per.
verted ore. II the law DO tr0e Application OF
them, then Property ahoud be taXed TO MAINTAIN
q religious Establishment. Why not The we'll
being of the Stste demands that all toe children
within her borders should ba trained IN tho duties
of Religion this ii required " not ior tno cake OF
part but of ALL" Where all sIe 80 Stained,
"there will inevitably 90 Las vlco aud c'iae,
more morality AID virtue, than WHARF, ignorance 10
common consequently, Properly, being more safe
from depreciation, han much higher ya'1e
Therefore, the people should vote law by winch
Property Il. g. land h0ldersj should Dc made 70
anvuort IA establishment which would 80 astjngy
bless the commuaiEY. Adopting then, your own
conclusion, "ue maintain that, on aeveral distac.
erouuds il ia tbs interest Of Property D. 9. The own
ers Of il that allahould be reigloosly trained, &c
"and that the children trained ia any District
are not tbs ory patoons beneiitsd By shec train
ire but th6s all who own property Ia or ne II it
are benefited kewiae
Now coafess cannot ace but that the one con.
cusion follows Just ss naturally SIS the other and
bow II ue eitaer may be. any one not inferior tothe
'hat.eyed' small soued,' easily perceive
Your illustration Mr. Editor, or, you term it, ap
p.ioalion would be good were it not pure felton,
having 10 foundation in things as they are. lnthis
respect it is most remarkably unlike tue clear and
practical good sense in Mr. A BIS letter And
here let ne ask why you did not yIndlcata ths pet
Law Of the people from the charge OF Injustice and
Oppression made by Mr A b.? The instances Mr..
A. B. enumerates are not supposed; they came
under bis own observation. Now, why did you
lot deny aud prove to the contrary thai In the M
srnnces cited by A 4. tho law operated unJustly
and oppressYely e? You could not. Why did you
not say ii was but single District, and that She
universal action Of the law could never be d5ter-
mined ~ ts action in angle District! This would
have been the most sensible answer you could have
made; but you did not make Il; aud Tor the staple
reason thas tuCh M aoswer would have suggested
to every Thinking nan this sufficient reply Why,
an Districts throughout tho country are ia al re-
speots alike. They Sll have about the same man
Der OF inhabitants, about the Sane amount Of prop
erty, about the same number OF children 70 be edu-
cRted and therefore, L tie action Of she lsw be
unequal and thus oppressive ii one Di5.rct the
prohabiiitiea that It will be SO N al amount well
nigh to g demonstration,
Yer, Mr. Editor / oppose thia law upr on these
grounds ouiy. think you viii agree visa me IN
thia: :has if 8 law be enacted which, beslda work
ipg badly does nos attain the end proposed, that
ln@ should be repealed. Tho end this aW pro
poses 49, to provide ior too education of poor call