New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-01-30


than he states bis opinions. lie conp''ni'' n.'n
that be is called by THE TRIBUNE "a dl'unloni'';
and in the second place. thu; be is declared 70 nave
yo,Jv become such. With this personal mater we
shall make very short work IL is not question
of the leas. consequence whether or not our corre
.nonden, be ga disuniOnst in the popular and gen.
. e,slly received acceptation Of the term 30 long
8. bis views lead Just as inevitably to practical dis
rn;on ss the views Of Mr. Garrison or Mr.. Wendell
Phillips; and il is matter Of less consequence
whether or not be has recently embraced such
views. or has entertained them from his tender
years. Our simple statement was hardly worth
such an elongated refutaton. a person who sud-
dtply proclams to the world for the first time, his
conclusions, can hardly expcc; the public to be
familiar with his private processes aud internal eh-
erci.es of spirit; we call him recent convert and
in he construction Of the word recent it does not
seem to us that year or two can make much moral
difference. Our correspondent should know by
this time that THE TRIBUNE has little need OF
shielding itself behind the alterations or idiosyncra-
cies of anybody; and if he had called this fact
calmly TO mind be would have saved himself much
discomfort and several sheets of paper.
We have read this letter several times aud with
much attention, ard we must confess that we con-
sder it a very odd tumble, very circular piece OF
logic, and very conlu,ed statement OF opinion, IN
all Of which respects it strangely differs from the
usual Efforts Of its author. Only one thing can
with certainty be said of it. The writer is In a
very low state of mind, and appears to have en-
grated upon bis political creed fatality quite
Oriental lie has fixed upon a predetermined
order of events, and has quietly seated himself to
await the terrible contamination with the stoclsm
of Mille1ite at midnight in a cemetery. True, he
talks Of leading forlorn hopes, and announces that
be "yet carries the flag of resistance;" b1t then
soldier who leads a for!Orn hope 30 feebly and
waves The flag of ress ance go TREMENDOUSLY, may
fairy be considered already enamored Of defeat.
But it is not merely in his fororn hopes and flags
that the writer is inconsistent. He see ms to be
very much in the dubious position of the ca. in the
adoge. Il desire" he says, mo such thing as
"the dissolution of the Union" ale. the North
I" and South, he says, in q moment after, "part
in the manner that becomes the civilization of the
"nnete. nth century" Prepare, thcn," he
SAYS, in another place, in deliberate and sober
manner, "for what apparently awaits u.s." In
deed We may as well say here that the Only differ
| ence between this writer and the Worcester
refcners is that they expect the dissolution
of the Union and DO desire it, while he expects the
dissolution Of The Union and does no. desire t. Aud
yet We do not see why his premises are not thoir
| premises; why their conclusions should not be his
conclusions, and his desires as ardent as theirs.
They are in great hurry to sever the bond while
be is patient and resigned; aud yet if Freedom is
never sgain to be Triumphant and if Slsyery-exten-
sion is inevitably to be the policy ofthe future as 1t
has heen thepOlicy of the past what right have we
to wait and how can tender cOnsciences reconcile
themselves to condition of things which will spread
| this great curse over soil which might otherwise
| be preserved uncontaminstedl We have hope AMI
therefore We are wiling to stay in the Union; the
| Worcester people have no hope, and are therefore
ready, acting boldly upon their convictions, to go
out oft; our correspondent has no hope, and why
should he not be ready to go out Ofiti If we can
not unite this Gordsn knot, in Heavens name let
us cut 1t at once! We are willing to work away
with il little longer. Again, see whittier this
writer's loose way of presenting the question leads
| him. lie talks of "a shameful desertion Of our
principles and our duty in acquiesciRg in Slavery
| extension. Well, for that matter, acquiescense is
just as shameful now, and yet our friend is willing
no,o to acquesce in that for which he believes there
is no remedy but disuniOn, and yet he does not
"desire disunon, and has never expressed any
- such desire" Is not this "a shameful desertiOn
"of his principles and his duty"
We suppose that, since he does not desire its
dissolution, our correspondent viii admit, putting
Slavery out of the question, that from the Union
are derived certain substantial advantages. We
certainly think so. We believe the main idea of
Federal Union of separate Commonwealth to be
politically just. We do not believe that the great
statesmen who framed the Constitution were de-
ludtd by sounding fallecy or by "a glittering
generality" We believe, and reason teaches us to
believe, that lin union there is strength Now,
we are not ready to throw away these advantages
nor 10 ci,card this strength. The future holds in
it coed hap and sorrow. We mean still to be
hopeul still to believe that the affairs of earth are
ordered by divine destiny; still to trus. some
thing TO the influence Of sound Opinit Ne of religion
aid If philosophy. 1t is true tina. events sore-
times occur which sorely try our trust bu: other
lands have emerged in the light of great and benef-
cent STATE sman,hip, from darkness deeper than
that which now surrounds US. Tue friends of
Freedom have the political power, would they
but use it, and they are u, liberty 20 use it for the
prevention Of Slavery extension in various cOnst:-
tu.;oDal ways When the North is re ldy for Dis