Daily national Democrat., 1860-12-02
"Another Poet in Love with Papacy.n


Of the symbolic ritual by which the Romist
religion faseinates its devotees, should in
spire imaginative persons who have no very
settled ideas Of faith and dicirine, with nd-
mirauon and hence We are not greatly Ia
ken aback when the poetical editor Of the
Murysville Democrat comes to the rescue oi
his brother rhymer. who has recently made
himself conspicuous by defense of Papal
despotsm. Bayurd Taylor, moreover, when
in this country established pretty strong
claim to the gratitude OF his Marysyile broth
er by styling him the Poet of California, and
a poet Is not the man to forget past fnvors.
however oblivious he may be to facts in
controversy, Taylor has recommended the
Papal Government, in Il letter, from which
We published extracts the other day, as emf
nently worthy the respect and good wishes of
Americans For showing up the inconsisten.
ey and absurdity of such recommendation,
the Democrat retorts upon US as follows.
Bayard Taylor is catching it from ultra
Protestant sheets, because he has had the
manliness to declare that the secular rule of
the Pope Of Rome is no despotism, but on the
contrary, mild and bene6cent. lie says the
Government is one of the uost economical IN
Europe, the salaries o! the highest State Off
GERS do not exceed $4,000 a year the whole
civil list costs about 100000, and the system of
public schools is most admirable Taxes are
light, free hospitals for the sick pocr are pro-
vided, and the aged and suffering are well
cared for
This, we must admit is rather poor pic
ture OF despotism. The only answer to make
to such a showing is to dispute the truth Of
the facts set forth. But Mr. Taylor has been
at Rome and he knows what he is talking
about. Those who dispute his woid may
have been there and may not. But we will
take Mr.. Taylor's word in preference.
"Mr. Taylor having been to Rome of
course settles the question for the editor of
the Democrat, to v HON his word is as good
pledge that he knows what he is talking
about, as it was when he styled our cotem
porary the Poet of California But others
have been to Rome before and since Mr. Tay-
lor made his dreamy pilgrimage, and among
them the author of our statements the other
day"
The intimation that we take sides with
Bayard Taylor, because that gentleman spoke
well of US, in one Of his published letters, is
really too small thing to deserve notice,
and all we have TO say, in reply to that por-
ton of the Uuon's article, is that we are
afraid (although we hope it is not the case)
that it shows the caliber of the mind which
brought it forth BY the measurement of the
writer's own intellect, perhaps does he Judge
he capacity of the ntelects of Others. 1t is
frequently the case that men who never get
praise from any distinguished source. simply
because they do not deserve it, imagine that
those who do receive such notice are vastly
lifted up by the circumstance. They know
that they would scarcely be able to contain
in a similar situation. and they
fancy that every body else is constituted in
the same way. They forget that praise is
seldom intoxicating to any mind that is above
and that an intellect, which is
worth being praised at all rather strives to
aeserre praise than simply to receive its be-
stowal. 1t is your very small men who be-
come fattered to death with a little notice
But, we waste time, over matter of too
little importance.
The Union seems to take it for granted that
we are in love with "Papacy," simply be-
cause we say that We believe Bayard Taylor,
who has been at Rome and has told what lie
saw with his own eyes. We love truth more
than we do "papacy" or protestanism, and
we are liberal enough to do justice to any
Church or creed or sect whatever. Bavard
Taylor says that the temporal domination of
Rome is no despotism. and goes on to prove
it, by stating facts which are quoted in brief
above. The Union quotes whole column
and over ofone thing and another from Black
woods Magazine and some other authority
and triumphantly intimates that it has set
tied the question, and that Bayard Taylor is
proven to be in the wrong. Well now,
what is the true state of the case? The
whole column and over of stuff quoted does
not affect the facts stated by Mr. Taylor at
all. There is nothing in all the vaunted ex-
tract that overthrows a solitary fact that he
has advanced. lie said that The Papal Gov
ernment was economical The Unions qno
tations do not dispute 1t. lie said that taxes
were light, that free hospitals were provided
for the sick and the poor aud that the aged
and suffering were well cared for. The
Unions quotations initiate against none of
these propositions. What then does the
Unions lengthy extract amount to? Moth
ing at ALL except sort of general oppugna-
tion against the secular domination of the
Pope. Taylors facts stand untouched, and
they are the points under consideration.
The Union has heretofore prided itself on
It's freedom from personalities, and we cannot
account for its present puerile resort to such
weapons in any other manner than by the
hypothesis that it really has no other force in
this case to employ. What matters it wheth.
er Bayard Taylor endorsed us as a poet or
not or whether the Union thinks we were
tickled to death over it or not TAYLOR has
stated certain things as facts We say we be
lieve them to be true. Now, let the Union
disprove them.
We conclude, by informing the Union that
we are not Catholic or to use a phraseology
more acceptable to it, "Papist." We are
liberal in our views, and are of the opinion
hat the Nineteenth Century is not exactly
the era for bigots to flourish in. There is a
little too much light and the mouldy winged
bats of the past cannot fly about with safety.
In San Francisco, Wednesday evening,
Robert Q. Rogers delivered a lecture in aid
Of the militia of that city The subject was
"The Third Napoleon" The Bulletin speaks
of Mr. Rogers as "the famous Passed Mid
shipman of the Mexican war, who helped cut
out the Creole from under the walls of San