Muscatine journal. [volume] (Bloomington, Iowa) 1849-185?, 1853-09-23
Reply to solicitor"

Reply to solicitor"
Perhaps We should apologize to our rend-
ers for occupying SO large a space in our
o>!umns in the discussion of the doctrines
Of Free Soilism. A number of individuals
have seen proper to object to the remarks
we made upon that subject some six or sew
en- weeks since, and whenever they have
given reasons for their objections, we have
attempted to reply. We wrote that article
in all candor, mud can maintain every inch
OF ground we assumed, notwithstanding
correspondents charge us with being ssthiev-
ish," "absurd," saddle brained," aboy-
ish, !" "yerdant,'' "deyold of reason.o &c.
We can stand all such imputations for the
sake of free discussion.
"Objector,' In order to refute our assor-
tions Eve call it nothing else) that the
South was willing to give up their slaves
whenever peaceful mode of disposing of
them could be found, quoted from the
speeches of Calhoun and McDufie. Now
what sort of argument, yea, what kidd Of
authority is that? They were both men as
stubborn, and as willing to see the Union
dissolved, as the abolition incendaries them.
selves. They only spoke for South Carroll
ma, and for ten years before their deaths,
they neither of them knew any other coun-
try save South Carolina. They spoke NOT
the views of the South they spoke only
their own views. Let the meddling agital
tors raise means to pay the south for theit
slaves and provide means for removing them
from their country, and sec if the South
will not abolish slavery. wilberforce, by
his active exertions, procured grant
OF EGO, 900, 900 from the British Parlia.
ment to pay for England's slaves, and when
professed Abolitionists o; this country will
80 to york in earnest, and with their sub
scription papers traverse the country and
solicit ssmateial aldo for similar purpose,
there may be some hope for them (the Abo-
litionists) at least. If they will pass the
p'pers along all the time, they will keep
themselves out of mischief if nothing more.
Now if the gentleman loves the authority
of John G. Calhoun SO we'll, we will give
him some more of it, in reply to another
contradiction Of Mr. collector" What
caused the separation of the NJ. e. Church !?
Hear what Calhoun says in speech in the
Senate Chamber of the United States -
'"Thc first of these cords which snapped
under its explosive force, was that of the
powerful Methodist Episcopal Church. The
numerous and strong ties which held
lttogether are all broke, and its unity gone"
Calhoun was surrounded by the talent OF
the American Congress, and was then so
near the grave as to be unable to deliver his
speech, and his colleague read it for him; it
was the last speech he ever wrote. Now
why was not that assertion denied if
it was false? Was there no member of our
National Congress so well posted up in this
matter as our friend Mr.. COLLECTOR
Daniel Webster replied to that speech, and
what did he say upon the subject of chu;ch
separation? In his 7th of March speech
wefnl the following language, speaking OF
shat same church: "That separation was
brought about by difference of opinion upon
shis particular subject of slavery.
I have read all their proceedings and all
their arguments but have never yet been
able to come to the conclusion that there
was any real ground for that separation:
in other words that any good could be pro-
duccd by hat separation"
Now Webster's opinion may be worthless
an Mr.. COLLECTORS estimation, but he is
one of those "aged and gifted statesmen''
that advocated the doctrine of the Fugi-
tive Slave Law, which the gentleman seems
to have such particular respect for.
We confess We are favored with our share
OF that "vcrdancy' common to young
manhood, but God grant it may not cling
so tcnaciously to us in our old age, as it
does to some men VIC wot Of.