The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1850-12-11
SOUTHERN PRESS
WASHINGTON CITY.
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER IL, 1850.
r3y- The editor of the Washington Union

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER IL, 1850.
az The editor of the Washington Union
retreats from half of his accusations against
u.s. He first charged us with hostility TO the
institution of marriage and to public decency
He now reeedes to the position of eonvicting
US of" advocating, on the ground of expediency,
the policy Of not prohibiting by laW the marriage
of negroes and whites"
This we understand to be his last effort
although his argument is so ricketty and vermi-
cuar, that it is difficult to understand what he
wants to prove, and how he thinks he proves it.
We are surprised at his moderation. From
the manner he begun, We did not know but that
we were next to be convicted Of atheism and
treason. As, however, this abatement of the
Union can hardly be attributed to any sense of
shame or Of principle, we suppose we are in
debted for it to the spirit of compromise, and
may regard ourselves as lucky in escaping with
the charge only of advocating, on the ground
of expediency, the policy of not prohibiting by
law the marriage of negroes and whites" which
is all true except the advocating. What we
said about the expediency was:
Nor is the senior editor now satisfied of the
expcdicncy of such q law, even if the power
existed. For if Boston or New England white
fanatics, male or female, insist on marrying
negroes we are not quite sure that they should
be prevented by law. Such connection would,
we think, be about as effectual a cure of their
flnaticism rs anything that could be done and
as destru tive of their influence.
But the Southern States all prohibit the III
tcrmarriage of whites and blacks Yes, because
in the South the subsection of one race 10 the
other, is Il fundamental condition, not only of So
ciety but of domestic life, and therefore of the
political system. The intermarriage Of the toO
races ao0ud be destructive of ai and the institu-
tons of society and property are entitled to re-
spcct, as well as marriage.
In the North it is rot so. In some of her
States the negro is citizen-has a vote, and is
eligible to Office.
This is the case in Massachusetts. In New
York he can vote if he has little property
What could be more inconsistent than in Massa-
chusetts where the black is admitted to the bar,
10 the legislature, where he can become n ruler
of the people, to prohibit him from marrying
those for whom he makes laws In other
Northern States he is simply denied the right Of
voting.
Whilst therefore, laws and opinions at the
North tend to destroy the natural and actual dis
parity and repugnance of the two races, and to
promote domestic and social connection, we
hold it to be not only Il violation of State
constitutions, but of doubtful morality, to
prohibit their ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS illicit con-
ncctions are productive of all the evils of
intcrmarriage and Of much misery and vice be-
sides.
None but the most fanatcal and the most de-
graded whites will form such connections, and
it is in vain to attempt to save such people from
themselves by law.
That such fanaticisn and degradation should
exist, results in great measure from the abb
sence Of slavery and the war upon it. But to
the extent to which they do exist the evil is
DONE and the prohibition of intermarriage which
cannot prevent sexual connection where other
laws and opinions arc destructive of repugnancy,
il no remedy, but may be al aggravation No
thing is more deuloralizing and exterminating to
superior race, than sexual connection with an
inferior.
We have italicsed some of the expressions
in order to bl.ze the way along the argument
10 rectify the devious rneanderngs Of the Union.
There is no advocating the expediency, even of
mot prohibiting BY law aboutt. But there is the
expression of doubts about the morality, consis-
tency and efficiency of such legal prohibition
on persons and communities, rhose opinions
and institutions are based upon the assumption
that the two races arc equal. In such 4 state
of tranquil incertitude wo still remain, notwth-
standing the distempercd defamation of the
Union And we are still not quite sure OF the
expediency of prohibiting by law fanatic whites
from marrying blacks-nay, rc are not quite
sure but it is the duty of such whites to marry
blacks, and thus eviuce the sincerity of their
belief that the two races are equal, and are
separated only by prejudice aud cruelty. We
do think that such an experiment would be n
pretty cffectual cure Of the fanacisn or at least
of its influence.
AS the editor of the Union has not even a
respectable notion Of the nature Of government,
as there never yet wandered along the crooked
passages and murky atmosphere of his intellect
the appariton of an argument, we shall take
this occasion in this age of Conventions and
Constitution tinkcring to present the proper
function of government. 1t is to protect exist
ing institutons-not to change them, or to
create new ones. There are many people who
believe that government or law created the in.
sitution of property; many more that it estab,
lishe the Institution of 81 very rs the editor OF
the Union does that it his that of MARI 'ge. If
this We're SC, then government might destroy
them all, and it would be necessary only for a
majority of the people to cali n convention to
form State constitution, to put not only the
institution of property, but of slavery and mar
rage in their power. This wonld be des-
potism as absolute as that Of Nicholas.
The editor Of the Union has no moro sense
than to say that the "cri sanction" of the law
gives to marriage call its validity and force"
He might as we'll say that the civil sanction of
the relation of parents and offspring, constitutes