New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1855-06-05


equivocal, not to say typocrtical position oil
confessing Slavery to be an evil, weeping over
il and then going on to perpetuate and nd
il. nothing now remains for the slaveholders
EXCEPT either to tuin their attention to some
speedy and effectual means Of getting rid OF an
adu tilted evil, or else to maintain with Mr..
Fitzhuch that Slavery lie not an evil. This Is
the alt, rpative to which the pro-slavery party
is now reduced; an6 as Providence ofte a works
by very mysterious means employing the most
unexpected and, huns My speaking, the most
unlikely agents to accomplish its purposef,
perhaps this very Mr.. Fitzhugb, this Ju'tifier
ard Philosopher of Slavery, as he dubs himself,
is enc of the instruments which wise Provi-
des ce intends to employ for bringing up the
South to the sticking point of emanc patton
Praise may be perfected aud wisdom educed
not merely out of the mouths of babes aud
,ueklings. but also cut of those Of grown up
nib1ies. Tie precedent of Balaam's ass is
highly encouraging.
There is method of demonstration much in
use with geometricians called the redaetio ad
oLsur1pm 1t consists in assuming proposition
to be true and then proceeding to reason upon
il and to draw conclusions from it, aud so de-
monstratipg its falsehood by showing the absurd
consequences to which it lends This method
is also very applicable to moral, political and
economical questions, in which point of view
Nr Fitzhugh's Sociology for the South is by no
means without it's value. Many fallacies, con-
tradictions and palpable inconsistencies which
| in
speeches and detached newspaper essays being
brought together and placed side By side in book
arc at once fully detected and clearly refuted,
End not the less so that Mr.. Fitzhugh does not
intend it and does not seem TO be conscious OF
it. Take the book altogether and it may properly
enough be described as the case of Fitzhugh
against Fitzhugb. The Kilkenny cats have made
themselves famous in story by eating up each
oher. NJ Fitzbugh does much more than that
he eats up HIMSELF Long before he reaches the
erd of his book not the smallest grease-spot OF
him is left. He seems indeed to Imagine him.
self burning, shining and perpetual light in
the frmsment of Slavery; but the truth is,
Slavery won't bear the light; and even such
farthinc tallow candle as this of Mr.. Fitzhugh's,
lighted as it is at both ends and speedily burn
ing out, still serves while it does burn, the SIM
Gle purpose and no other of showing up the
enoimities of Slavery and the straits to which
its apoogists are reduced
Mr.. Fitzhueh is a very pious man. He rev.
erences The Bible, denounces infdels and free
thinkers, and of course relies confidently on the
Bible argument in favor of slavery. AS to this
point, however, he modestly gives precedence
to the reverend and learned Moses Stuart, late
of the Andoyer Theological Seminary, whose
"Conscence and the Constitution" he largely
quotes. The Bible has long stood out against
the assaults of ayowed unbeevers. Atpresent
| il is exposed to a much more dangerous attack
on the part of those who profess the most per-
ft ct faith in it and the greatest reverence for it,
1t is now much quoted for three purposes: for
the defense and justification Of slaveholding, OF
grogshops, and of polygamy. Mr.. Fitzhugh is
| savage aganft the MOrmOns; but while scout
ing the example of Abraham as polygamist, he
insists upon it as a STAKEHOLDER. All we have to
say upon this point is that if the Bible survives
this triple appeal to it on the part of slayehold-
ers, rumsellers, and poIygamists, it may safely
set at defiance the attacks Of all other foes.
But however, upon points of Biblical crti-
ci.m, Mr.. Fitzhugh may give up the leadership
TO our northern theological scholars, when it
comes to the philosophical question, Curtius-like,
he pluDges into tie gulf in person. He takes,
| however, due and judcious precautions to pre-
pare the minds Of his readers against forming
expectations which he has no power to fulfill
With that singular propensity for eating up HIM
self to which we have alresIyy referred, this
ho"''Trl s"r..acrn philosopher, this justifier of
Slavery on philosophical grounds, coolly informs
bis readers that PHILOSOPHY is always wrong,
and instinct and common sense always right,
because philosophy is unobseryant aud reasons
from narrow and insufficient premises, while
common sense sees and observes all things, Civ
ing them their due weight, comes to just con-
illusions, but being busted about practical
every day matters, has never learned how to
lock into the operations Of its mind and see
how ii has come TO its conclusions" (p.ll5. Now
as to this question Of Slavery We should not be
unwilling to throw philosophy to the dogs (but
what then would become ofMr. Philosopher Fitz-
hugh and his book y and to leave the question to
be tested by instinct and common sense. But
Nr. Fitzhugh is too cunning for that. He in
sists upon quite a different test. "Men of sound
judgment" he tells US, "are always men nho
gire nrong reasons for their opinions" Up. 49,
And certainly if bad reasoning be the test of
sound judgment, Mr.. Fitzhugh's soundness is
beyond all question.