New-York daily tribune., 1858-08-10

We called ATTENTION TIE other day, to recekt
detrmlna.o1 of the General Assembly Of the
Presbyterian Church not to recognize as valid any
marriage ore Of the parties to which had former
partrer living, from whom divorce had been oS.
taired for some otter reason thsn adultery. AT
the sane time we observed that this interference
on the part of tie Assembly with State legislation,
and this refusal to recognize, or even to tolerate 10
latiops expressly authorized BY tho laws OF some,
indeed of meat of tie States, so far from having
provoked ary outsry from the Pro Slavery press,
lad elioted from certain leading prints on that
fide a decided approval. This remark Of ours
seems quite to have stirred up the bile OF III.
Journa, Of Commerce, which print, however, In
stead Of attempting spy viz dicaion Of its own coz
sissepcy seems disposed 10 sink that question
quite out of sight, in charge which it brings
ssan.t Us of insiruatng false charges against the
Pr.tJ .erian Church.
IN tho coure Of the article 70 which We have
referred, We took occasion TO put the following
question:
Gift be adultery aesins. which the General A.
soIlbly ol the Presby Church is called upon 10
protect TO Larry person divorced except Tor the
single recogriZed by that Church az Scupturs,
is Dot airo faultefous operation, equally ealing
for protes. 70 encousse aud require ones oo!ored
eervaut, havlrg already a husband or wife, nsrried
with al due religious ceremoues, in Virginia or the
District CT Columbia 20 parry over .galn IN Alabama,
merely % su. the convenience or to increase the ea.e
ce1sus OF some Presby terian household, INTO which,
by the operation OF the domestic siavetrsce, he or
she has been transferred =
This question Tho Journal Of Commerce insists
amounts to Oh innuendo Of what ws did not dare to
charge In terms "thst the Presbyterian Church
does rot consider the secosd marriage of slave,
while his first wife is living. an adultercus mar
"Iisge; in other words. that that Church recog-
mixes tte propiiety of slaves remarying as often
''ss they change plantations and masters Now,
in point OF fact, tie innusndo Of the above para.
graph points in an entirely different direction.
1t wss not the doctrine but the practice Of the
Church at which our query Na aimed. In
asking the question whether tho Church was not
called upon to protest against prevailing practice,
instances Of which not unfrequently occurred even
in Presbyterian households, of preferrng the con-
venence or profit of the master to the religious obl
cation of tie slave, Of course We took il for granted
and that Was tie very .tiDg Of inquiry, that the
Church recognized tha. religious obligation.
Recognizing this religious obligation on the part Of
the slaves, there would seem to be very strong aud
special reasors why tie Church should insis. upon
the recognition Of it on the part Of Presbyterian
shareholders. 1t is not to be expected that every
Presbyteriau negro can rival the religious hero
lem Of Uncle Tom. With q whip vigorously
cracked shout his e&s b the sinewy arm of
some P,esbyteri clergyman or church member
we'll practiced in such exercises, ordinary negro
| and especially woman-aId it is il the re-mAr.
rage of bis female slave that mMter has the
strongest interest however carefully educated aud
thoroughly indoctrinsted IN Tie Presbyterian disei
pli1e, might be apt to forget Nat the Presbyterian
| Church has q thousand tine, a. TAe Journal Of
Commerce Gays, declared all such marriages adul.
terous not indeed in terms applying to the partcu.
| lar case Of slave husbands ADd wives sold away
| from each other, but In general terms which il.
clude .hs: csse with others. II might seem tha.
the Church, instead of Emitag itself to s condem-
ration of the sin Of the sisye, might with proPrety
| take in hand the Sin of the master in the employ.
ncnt of force or persussios 70 bring about such
| result.
But i. not The Jearnal Of Commerce itself guilty
Of "a false and groundless insinuasOn' in under
taking 70 assert - it does, that those Of the Tract
Society who wished tact TO be published on the
Scriptursl duties Of matters, desi,ed TO n.olu,e
practice equivalent to that of preaching frcm the
pulpit at particular individuals for special aims
We were not aware that the suppressed tract
called sryb dy BY psme, that the existence in it
of spy .uch personality was made q reason for il.
suppression. We understood tina, it Wa suppressed
on The ground thas its publication nisdtbe construed
into a s.ssuPt to interfere with tie Is ~ and usti-