New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1855-08-17
GERRIT SMITH, AGAIN.

Mr. Gerrit Smith has done US the honor to
address a second letter to THE TRIBUNE, to
which, Notwithstanding it's enormous length,
we in tura do the honor of place in our col.
umns. We are happy to say that it is an i'm
proyement on bis former effort. Where that
was furious, this is mild; where that distinctly
and violently alleged what was not the fact, this
performs that uDgrateful Office with striking
ysgueness and moderation. At this rate, if Mr..
Smith should have occasion to favor us with q
third communication, we shall expect it to be
an exemplar of epistolary susvity, worthy of
first place in any new Model Letter Writer,
which our enterprising publishers may bring OUT
Tor the use Of juvenile ald unsophsticated
minds.
But, while we award such praise to the amelio
rated style and sweetened tone OF our CORE
spondent, we must be pardoned for saying that
We would gladly have been spared such an
evidence of moral improvement There are
controversies, perhaps, in which we do not re.
greet to see our adversary display an eclatint
weakness, laying himself open to merciess
tbrusts and cuts in return. But with the pres
ent champion there is no pleasure in such a
triumph. We respect too deeply the goodness
of bis heart to look on without pain when he
demonstrates, with wilfGl needlessness, the want
of brains in his head For this reason, we
should greatly prefer to have been spared the
publication of the feeble and indiscreet lucubra-
ton for which we to-day make room. Letter
writing is a dangerous practice; it has killed
off macy a public man; and, while Mr.. Smith
has better holds on life than his political
achievements can offer, and is safe even against
the blows of his own pen, there are other
spheres of labor in which he can at once render
good service to the public and do credit to his
own regulations in this, he seems rather to waste
his time and talents to no purpose whatever
Mr.. Smith, with reckless and passionate
us in bis former letter with being "the chief
"and most responsible propagation of the cal
umDy that he did not vote on the Nebraska
"bill" We denied that this charge possessed
any foundation whatever; and in turn declared
that Mr.. Smith had broadly sinned against the
truth in making it. Such was the issue between
us; and in meeting it, man of common sense as
disputes that Mr.. Smith means to be the latter
would have resorted to file of THE TRIBUNE,
and would have either quoted from il the proof
that We had propagated the calumny in ques-
tion, or he would have owned like man that he
was wrong in thus accusing US. But Mr.. Smith
does neither. He neither establishes his own
case DOR confesses ours; but without particle
of evidence, repeats his allegation, putting 1t on
II e imaginary ground that our readers have all
believed him guilty of Sinking the vote on
the Nebraska bill, because he wanted to go
to bed Now, how does Mr.. Smith know what
is believed by all the million of people who read
THE TRBUNEl Or, if he has some supernatural
means of knowing that they entertain such an
opinion about him, what right has he to hold US
Il sponsible for it What we have said or i'm
piled Of bin is not hidden or doubtful; there is
no occasion for guesses or insnuAtions about il;
and Mr.. Smith ought to be ashamed of himself
for Repeating, on such silly grounds, accusations
which We positively deny, and for the truth OF
which no proof can be brought. Nay, more: hs
goes further and charges US with having spoken
expressly and strongly against his anti-slayery
"integrity" False, Mr. Smith, every word Of
it. We never uttered or implied doubt Of
your integrity, unless you regard the statement,
forced from us most uuwillingly, that you are
deficient in common sense and too abundant in