The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1855-05-31
THE NEW YORK TRIBUNE AND THE EAST
ERN WAR.

The New York Tribune is displeased with
our criticism of its course in relation to the
Eastern war.
"The National Era" it says, ais astonish-
ed that the Tribune should not 90 for the Allies
In the Eastern war, and considers our position
anomalous, friends as we are to Freedom and
enemies of Slavery. Some of the remarks of
| the Era are quite Impairment such as foreign
writer's who do missionary work for Russia
| through the columns of the Tri6uae'-there
| being none such, and never having been. Be-
sides, the Tribune is only to be treated in argu-
| ment as an impersonal representative of certain
| opinions-as journal, and not as collection
of individual utterances"
The National Era was not astonished that
the Tribune should not go for the Allies in
the Eastern War; but it was and is still at
loss to understand why the Tribune should " 90
for Russia Why not state our position cor
rectly?
We are sorry that the alluson to the " for.
eign writer's" for the Tribune, should have pro-
voked such an ebullition of temper Our in
tention was simply to state fact, which
might throw some light on what appeared
to us an anomaly. We remembered that
that journal, few weeks since, replying to
contemporary, frankly informed the public
concerning the composition of its editonship.
BY way Of illustrating this subject" it said,
give will state, that the staff of editorial
writers regularly employed by the Tribune con.
sists OF some twenty persons, and that the va
rious articles ION European affairs, the War,
&c.-Ed. Era. which the Courier attributes
to one, have proceeded from six different pens"
The Tribune having thus spoken unreservedly
of its interior management, we did not dream
that it would be considered impairment to al
Jude to its foreign writer's" who constitute
portion of this staff" We do not understand
it to deny that much, perhaps the larger por-
ton OF its editorials on the Eastern war is pre-
pared by these gentlemen; but the point of
the denial is, that they do missionary work
for Russia" Let the People judge between
us. If the editorials we refer to are not adapt
ed and intended to bring the Allies and their
Cause into disrepute, and create pro- Russian
Public Sentiment, all the world is laboring I'M
der prodigious mistake. But the Tribune,
we mean that Impersonslity which compre-
hends the entire phalanx of twenty editors.
as one and indivisible, leaves no room for
doubt-for continuing its reply to our remarks,
it says
owe are not oblvious of the Cars attack on
hungary; neither are we of Louis Bonapartes
on Rome; and in that respect France is much
more to be abhorred than Russia. AS for the
idea that the English oligarchic Government is
impelled or ever was impelled to wage war by
any other motive than selfshness, we consider
it too preposterous for serious discussion. Rus.
STA, in her outward policy, is a more humanizing
agent than Britain. English free trade is a
blight to all that touches it; while, since Russia
has adopted the protective policy, her industrial
means have improved to wonderful degree, and
her onward course Of civilization is patent to
the world. The best thing that could happen
to Turkey would be, that Russia would swallow
her up. Protected then in her manufactures,
she would flourish. AS for the danger to Eu.
rope from Russian growth, we have already. ON
repeated occasions, shown how chimericaI that
notion is. Moreover, as far as the United States
have an interest in the controversy at all. il is
that France and England united should not at,
tam position to dictate to the world. We need
Russia as a counterpoise to those Powers. Seen
through the free trade spectacles of the Era
liberty and civilization may depend on the tri
umph of the Allies; to our Judgment, however,
they have quite as much to hope from the sue
cess OF Russia. We trust that in any discussion
Of these points, which the Era may think prop
er to engage in, it will eschew useless personal
tiles, and courteously address itself to the mat
tiers at ISSUE"
This is plain enough. The Tribune desires |
that Russia should triumph, and thinks that |
the best thing for Turkey would be that Russia |
should swallow her up.
We will not say that we are shocked that a
liberal American Journal should take such a |
position; for we have ceased, in this age of
marvels and monstrosities, to be surprised at
anything. Let us then glance at the reasons
by which the Tribune seeks to indicate it.
l. Russia in her outward policy is more
humanizing agent than Britain"
O. England is for Free Trade; English
Free Trade is blight to all that touches it
Russia is for Protection-Turkey, swallowed
up by Russia, would be protected in her
manufactures and she would flourish
8. @There is no danger to Europe from Rus.
=