New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1850-06-21
NETWORK DAILY TRIBUNE, JUNE e1.

up New Mexico to Texas-we should nave
faint hope Of its ordering Texas to give 1t up
othe United States, or that Texas would com
NV if il did. The difference between hold
ing on and getting back is here vital. AS to
fighting. and all that, we maintain that the
decided interference Of the President ON the
right side will prerem bloodshed, which Is
otherwise imminent. Georgia would have
Numbered and driven off the Cherokees in
1886. had not President Adams told her
decidedly that she mustn't, and sent mill
tary force to let her see he meant it. As to
New-Mexico, the Military force is there; all
that is wanting is the moral force of an open
declaration by the President that he will pro-
tect New Mexico against all aggression. This
will prove a real peace maker. 1t is the lack
Of it that is brewing mischief.
We must not take space to follow The
Courier further Whoever sees in this
claim of Texas to the better part of New
Mexico only a scheme to extort money,
views it very specifically. Behind and be-
meath that is aggressive Slarery lustiag for
eTtcndcd dominion. We only ask of the
President that he repel invasion, defend the
unprotected, and faithfully execute the laws.
The Romnn Government md the Press.
| Bishop HUGHES occupies near a column of the
| Courier and Enquirer Of yesterday with renon-
STRANGE, very fair and temperate inits tone, against
practice, which he finds to be common among
English end American journals, of singing out the
Pontlfcal government from among the powers
Of Europe, and holding it alone up to Anglo.
Saxon excavation. In one paragraph he also al
Ieges that the Pope and Cardinals are fastened on
and held up to public ridicue and contempt BY the
| press Of this country.
As The Tribune has in time past commented
With "a much freedom as sincerity upon the proceed
! ires Of the Roman Government, and quite as often
and explicitly as any journal Of our acquantGnce,it
may be that the Bshop intends to include US In the
! sweep of bis censure. II so, we beg TO disclaim
lie intended admonition. We have not singled
out the Pope nor the Roman Government, and still
| less have we made of him of it an object Of rld
cue. We have not passed by St Petersburg
! Vienna Berlin nor st. James TO pour L" the whole
stream Of editorial vituperation against the Pope
ard the Cardinals of Rome" Nor, to say the
truth, do we know Of any considerable part of the
! American secular press which has done 80. There
are, no doubt instances where religious opposition
has given heat and frequency tO condemnatory re
marks upon Plus N. and the course he has been in
duced to take but believe that such has not been
the case with the great mass OF our political aud lit
ersry journals At least for one, we can say that
cur course in the matter has been dictated by no
such feeling but solely by political principles
which we imbibed with our mothers milk, and
! have since only had confirmed by history and
experience We have oil along regretted that the
monarch of Rome, who claimed an inherent prop
erty in her Government, and could even invoke the
aid of foreign bsyonets and canon TO restore him
/ TO its enjoyment was ut the same time, the head
ofthe Catholic Church. and in the conviction OF
millions. the earthly Vicar Of the Prince of Peace
We should have infinitely preferred that Demo-
crscy and Religion should not come into any sort
of collision, even though merely apparent one.
And our readers will bear us witness that we have
steadily endeavored to show that there was only
! the appeArance Of such collision, and that it was
the King, and not the Pope against whom De-
rpocrncy at Rome had commenced hostlitiesi
and "a far as we are informed, the whole quarrel
has in this country a. least been regarded as a
political one only, save in the exceptions above
mentioned Slice this is the case, aud since there
has been no such universal condemnation of the
Roman monarchy specially and exclusively, we
do not see the pertinency of the Bishops STRIFE
I II L., fair oaaail tho yvhOla
pross Of the country for the fault Of portion Of its
members. Nor DO we suppose he intends it we
uresume that that part Of his letter results from
want Conformation, or quite natural misconcep
ten Of tle iacts.
The Bishop argues a. length and with plausibty
that it would be unfair to blame the Pontficsl
I Government alone for faults which are common to
al Governments, and which are rather legacies Of
the past than creations Of the present. But this
is sheer overlooking OF the essential facts in the
csse. Were there nothing in the recent history Of
the Roman monarchy beyond what is involved in
this argument it would be correct had the Pope
steadily occupied his throne and taken care Of his
Administration in a regular way, could pre-,
sumo to attack him for not making it a. once ALSO
lutely perfect But the fact is that in November
Is4. he abandoned his Capital and leit his States
without government or authority. He was invited
TO return, but refused Tie people then dsliber
atey chose a Representative Assembly, and at
lsst Republican Governm ent was organized with
Z Immunity and calmness Of the population which
should give it in the eyes Of every Democrat the
noo.t conclusive sanction that belong to po-
li,icsl institutions. That Government again in
yited the Pope to return, Offering him every guar
antee Of safety and liberty in the discharge Of his
ecclesiastical functions which was In its power the
=. LII Ri.l,.n u. and