The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1850-06-20
From the New York Tribune
Mr.. MANN AND MR.. WEBSTER "A HARD HIT.

1t is known to the public that Mr.. Webster re.
Gently addressed letter to certain gentlemen Of
Newburyport, in which he took occasion to COM
ment with great severity upon some opinions put
forth by Horace Mann in his late address to his
constituents. As we have not published the New
buryport letter, we do not intend to copy the
reply; but the letter contains one or two hits, as
fair as they are hard, which cannot be omitted
from our columns. Mr. Mann begins by quoting
the following passage from Mr.. Webster's let
| ter:
II have seen publication by Mr.. Horace
Mann, Member of Congress from Massachusetts,
in which find this sentence. Speaking of the
bill before the House, he says:
60 This bill derides the trial by jury secured by
the Constitution. A man may not lose his horse
without right to this trial, but he may lose his
freedom. Mr.. Webster speaks for the South
and for slavery, not for the North and for free
dom, when he absndons this right This per-
sonal vituperation does not annoy me- but u lament
to see public man of Massach usetts so crude and
confused IN ms regal appreheasions, and b nrtie
acquainted with the Constitution Of his country,
as these opinions evnce Mr.. Mann to be. His
citation of supposed case, as in point, If it have
any analogy to the matter, would prove that if
!
he cannot lead him back vnhom a previous trial by
| jury 10 ascertain The right Truly, if what Mr..
| Mann says of the provisions of the Constitution
in this publication be test of his accuracy in the
understanding of that instrument, he would do
well not to seek to protect his peculiar notions
under its sanction, but to appeal at once, as others
do, to that high authority which sits enthroned
above the Constitution and above the law"
On this Mr.. Mann thus comments
Mr.. Webster "laments to see public man of
Massachusetts, so crude and confused in his legal
apprehensions, and so little acquainted with the
Constitution of his country, as these opinions
evince Mr.. Mann to be-" Yet he points out no
error of opinion. He specifies nothing as unsound
He presents no information, indictment, bill Of
particulars, or even the common counts.o Judg-
ment and condemnation alone appear. He seems
to have taken it for granted that he had only to
say was guilty, and then proceed to punish.
protest against and impugn this method of pro-
ceeding, by any man, however high, against any
man. however humble.
When Mr. Webster penned his lamentations
over my crudeness, confusion, and ignorance, he
doubtless meant to deal me mortal blow The
blow was certainly heavy; but the question still
remains, whether il ha Polyphemus struck hard
blows but his blindness left the objects of his pas
sions unbarmed.
But wherein do these erroneous "opinions"
consist, which Mr.. Webster does not deign to
specify, but assumes to condemn2 Fortunately, in
writing the sentences which he quotes for animad-
version, followed the precise meaning Of Judge
Story, as laid down In his Commentaries; and In
regard to the only point which is open to ques-
ton, / took the srdct words of that great Jurist
He speaks of the right of trial by jury in civil
casesn as an existing right before the seventh arti-
Gle of the amendment of the Constitution, which
preserves this right Sin suits at common law" had
been adopted,-3 Comm, G28. instead Of trans-
oribing Judge Story's words, ain civil cases,D
which present no distinct image to common minds,
supposed the everyday case of litigation respect
ing horse, which is "civil case - and this
difference Of form is the only difference between
my language and that Of the learned Judge.
can wish MIR. Webster no more fitting retribu-
tion after reposing from this ill-tempered attack
upon me, than to awake and find that it was Judge
Story whom he had maligned
But the opinion expressed by me on this point
does not need the authority Of any name to sup
port it; and the illustration which | give is not
only ineligible to every sensible man, but is also
Apostle. | said I" a man may not lose his horse
his property in horse without right to this
tralD Mr. Webster's comment is, that this case,
elf it have any analogy to the matter" means,
that if a mans horse stray into his neighbours
field he cannot lead him back without previous trial
", W
meaning of sentence more exactly changed
about, end for end Mr.. Webster may pitch sum-
mersets with his own doctrines but he has no
right to pitch them with mine. slid man may
not lose his horse, or his property in horse
without right to the trial by jury. He says |
said, man cannot find or retdke lost horse, with
out previous trial Dulee est dssipsrs in loco
Or it is pleasant to see grave Senator play upon
words but there must be wit to redeem it from
puerility.
But the ohildishness of this criticism is not its
worst feature. What is the great truth which Mr.
Webster aud his apologists attempt here to ridi-
cule2 1t is that while every man amongst us, in
regard to any piece of property worth more than
twenty dollars, of which violence or fraud may
attempt to despoil him, has a right to trial by
jury, yet mans freedom, and that Of his poster
ity forever, may be wrested from him, as our law
now stands, without such a trial Does not this
hold q mans freedom to he Of less value than
twenty dolarsl If two adverse claimants con-
test title to an alleged slave, whose market value
is than this sum, each is entitled to jury to
try the fact Of ownership. But If the alleged
slave declares that he owns himself he is debarrcd
from this right And this truth, or common
illustration Of it, Mr.. Webster and his apologists
think suitable topic for sneers or pleasantly
A foreign proverb says that for q man to kill his
mother is NOT IN good taste trust the moral and
religious people Of Massachusetts have too much
good taste to relish q joke on such theme.
Mr.. Mann then goes on to examine at length,
and with remarkable ability and learning, the
merits of the legal aud constitutional question of
granting a trial by jury to persons claimed as
fugitive slaves arguing that they have every way
good right thereto.
We quote the following paragraphs:
Mr.. Webster advises me, in certain contin-
gency, to appeal to that higher authority which
sits enthroned above the Constitution and above
the law take no exception to this counsel
because Of its of6cousness, but would thank him
for it. My ideas Of duty require me to seek anx-
iously for the true Interpretation of the Consti-
tuition, and then to abide by 1t, unswayed by
hopes or fears. II the Constitution requires me
to do anything which my sense Of duty forbids,
shall save my conscience by resigning my Office.
| am free, however, to say, that II In the dis
charge of my political duties should transfer
my allegiance to any other Power, should adopt
MIR Webster's advice, and 20 to the Power which
sits enthroned above rather than to descend to
that opposite realm, whence the bill which he so
cordially promised to support, must have emerged.
So
Mr.. Webster holds Massachusetts, up to the
ridicule of the world, because she grows fervid
on Pennsylvania wrongs, and he has deemed IL
his duty to inquire how many seizures Of fugitive
slaves have occurred in New England within our
time Is this the Christian standard by which to
estimate the evil Of eDcroachments upon the most
sacred rights Of men7 Ii repose in content
ment and indifference, because my own section, or
State or county, is As yet but partial sufferer,
why should not continue contented and indiffer-
ent while myself am safe In providing for the
liberties Of the citizen, under common Govern
ment, think Massachusetts, worthy of all honor
and not Of ridiculs, because she does grow fer
vid on Pennsylvania wrongs and ON tia wrongs
of an entire race, whether In Pennsylvanis or