Washington sentinel., 1854-01-07

poraries and neighbors. 1t is good sign.
A MEDAL TO HERO-CAPTAIN
| INGRAHAM.
Heroes are oftentimes worn threadbare by
much talk, as Presidential candidates are made
cheap and familiar by premature and long
continued concentrations. Kossuth came te
this country hero-he quit 1t broken dowr
mana long descent from the worshiped idol
to the neglected individual. Every man breaks
down who talks much about himself, or en-
courages other people to do so. People are
full Of change. They tire of worshiping one
man. 1t is pleasant occasionally to kneel-
it is painful always to be on ones knees-espe
looked for hero bursts upon the world, as stars
before unknown, startle the astronomer BY their
sudden appearance. The new hero may be as
modest in his demeanor as he is daring in his
deeds. He may be reserved and circumspect
He may shun the notice that his achievements
attract He may avoid talking of himself
| he may discourage such conversation amongst
others. This is the surest way of retaining his
hold on the affections and admirations of the
people.
But sometimes man performs so brilliant,
so unexpected, SO dazzling an exploit that he
Immediately becomes the object of all eyes
the subject of all tongues. 1t would be as i'm
possible to stop the rushing of the great cata-
act, and to drown its thunders as to stop the
affectionate clamors and repress the heart born
praises of, the people.
| Such an exploit was performed by Captain
Ingraham. 1t was done to uphold the honor
of his country. 1t was done at the peril of his
life-at the peril Of the lives Of all under his
command. 1t was done abroad, where there
was no help at hand. By his discretion, that,
was bloodless achievement, which any inca
pacity or mismanagement, would have made a
sanguinary strife 1t resulted in the main
tenance Of peace, when long and destructive
war might have been its consequence. 1t was
done with promptitude, when it might have
been deferred too late. Itwas done with daring,
when timidity would have infallibly spoiled it.
This act of our distinguished naval captain
has been the theme of every tongue. We
have not heard-we do not beleve-that he
has ever boasted of it himself, or sought notice
and praise from others. But after people
have talked about his gallantry, until they
have grown tired of the theme, they begin to
think that they have done enough for the man,
who did so much for them
We see from the debate in the House of Rep
resentatives on Thursday, on the resolution to
vote medal to Captain Ingraham, reported
from the Committee on Foreign Affairs, that
some difference of opinion existed as to whether
the honor proposed by the committee should be
conferred on Captain Ingraham, or not We
did not hear the debate. We have but read
condensed reports of it. 1t has, however, been
| represented to us by those who heard it, as very
| interesting, and quite brilliant Some gentle
men favored the resolution because it was based
on considerations Of philanthropy. Some re-
cognised the force and merit of such conside-
rations, but objected to the resolution, because
it did not superadd political reasons. Some
were opposed to the resolution in every aspect,
and in any form.
| We have no voice in the matter, and would
be the last to intermeddle in affairs that do not
concern us; but as portion Of the people, and
OF the press of the country, we feel privileged
to say what we think. We shall say it. We
think that Captain Ingraham deserves "a
medal, with suitable devices We think Cap
tain lngraham deserves sword. We think
that Captain Ingraham deserves the gratitude
Of his country. He has secured the last, the
first are yet to come.
Is there to be hairsplitting and double re-
6ning as to the considerations on which these
badges Of honor and these testimonials Of gra.
titude are to be predicated? When it was both
an act Of humanity and bold stroke for
American rights, why narrow it down to
either. Indeed it loses its merit when based
entirely on humanity. He was.an American
commander. He was the representative of his
country. As such he had power, or he had
not power. He had rights, or he had not rights
II ne had these rights and powers, then the
smaller consideration Of humanity to Martin
hoszta was merged and swallowed up in the
tue national powers and rights he represented.
II ne did not possess these powers and rights,
then ne had no business to meddle with mat
ters OF mere humanity-in which the lives Of
the men entrusted to him were imperilled, and