The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1857-03-28
THE SUPREME COURT AND THE NEW YORK TRl-
BUNE,

BUNE.
In reply the assaults of the New York Tribune upon
the late decision of the Supreme Court Of the United States
in the of bred Scott inquired of that Journal what
right liberty of its editor had been taken away by that
decision and in what respect the had given any SUI
perorty Of rights to southern northern man.
The Tribune answers by mentioning any right or lib
ery which it has lost pointing out any Partially shown
by the the South the North but by declaring
in general terms that the decision il attack upon those
arghts of human nature for which fathers fought in
the revolution. This is begging the whole question Its
reasoning is in circle First it makes the decision
outrage because it attacks certain rights and then it
declares that it has assailed these rights because it is
outraged 1t is very easy TO write general homies
upon humanity and the higher law and to the
tyranny Of in not giving equal rights to
men and womep black and white minors and adults but
such general homies sufficient reply to specific
inquiries such as we propoundea the Tribune If that
journal means to say that fathers fought for ahuman
nature in the of giving emancipation TO the slaves
its proposition directly in the teeth of all history
Did Jefferson regard the Declaration Of Independence
declaration of freedom his negro servants Did Wash
ngton understand that all the slaves he owned made
free by the treaty of 1877 Did Patrick Henry when he
cried "Give me liberty give me death r mean to say
give liberty for every Virginia negro give death
for MYSELF Ihese things So and these questions
be ruhfully answered in the Affirmative how happened it
that slavery not Immediately abolished by the
Of revolutionary srugge2 How happened it that con-
tnued in all the States and recognised in the
situton How happens it TO exist now in fifteen States Of
the Union and that in those States it is held to be beyond
the political interference of anybody except the people Of
the States where it exists What meant the ugtiveslave
law, signed by Washington? How slave States
admitted into the Union Where the need of Mis-
souri, Compromise allowing slavery side of ab
trary line and orbidding it the oher2 Why there
any question the of this very bred Scott and why
instead of claiming his freedom under the of 1920 did
he seek under the Declaration Of Independence and
by virtue of the rghts of human r. The Tribune
utterly fails to meet the case put to it, We regard it
admitting distinctly that right Of its has been
taken away by the decision referred and that south
man has any superiority by that decision any
northern man. and wonder that under such
circumstances il should assal the court having made
upon northern rights promulgated Shareholders
decision The truth is the court called to determine
certain points of constitutional law and the question be
fore it what anatical heorst might regard
the "rghts Of human nature what sober thinker
might regard the rights Of white man, but what
the meaning of the constitution and the law in ref
TO bred Scott who negro. ut is true that
bred Scott says the Tribune descended from Africans
and is black while descended from Europeans ard
white; but the rights Of human nature know
distinction founded this difference of origin and color
We congratulate the Tribune upon its full appreciation of
its color but whether 'he rights of human nature"
recognise any distinction founded color was not il
ought to remember the question before the court The
question before the was whether any such dislinc
ton recognised by the constitution and laws Of this
Union and If the editor of the Tribune ever gets before
the question like that advise him 10 stick
fast to his color and not presume too much upon he
rights of human nature"