The Buchanan County guardian. (Independence, Buchanan County, Iowa) 1858-1864, 1860-03-28
Our Neighbor and Mr.. Schurz.

ES Our neighbor Is not willing to
admit that he has shown blgoted spirit
in endeavorirg to connect CARL ScnURz
and the German Republicans with Inf
deity, and says he knows that he has not
particle of bigotry in his composition.
We certainly hope that our neighbor
judges himself Alright. We should be
sorry to see him influenced by that most
contracted, mean, unreasonable, despic-
able spirit. We are free to say that we
do not think he is, or that he really in
tended to excite such feeling in his
readers. But we want to call his atten-
ton TO one fact. Nearly the whole of his
last weeks article, of almost column,
is devoted to consideration of Scriptu-
raj views. Now how has this theologi-
cal matter crept into this discussion ? 1t
certainly has no place there. 1t was a
question of politics, originally, and GER
tainly the editor and his party have here
tcfore been indignant enough when they
thought they discovered an attempt to
mix politics and theology. How has it
come that it has been done i'm this case :?
Did we do it? we think not, Cor we
have been Directing to it from the begin
ming. We cannot think it comes in le-
Ultimately in considering any OF Mr..
ScHURz's positions. He, it is true, dis
cussed the Slavery question somewhat in
It's moral aspects, and reflected upon Mr..
DOUGLAS for his failure to recognize, or
his Indifference to, the moral signif-
canoe of the question. But he treated it
rs question of ethics, not of theology
There could have been no objection to
the editor doing the same, but to our
mind there is a manifest objection in his
answering by attacking Mr.. ScHURz's re-
ligious views-or. rather, what he as
sumes to be such for we much doubt
whether our neighbor has any knowl-
edge as to what Mr.. S. believes, theolog-
ieally. II the orators arguments and
premises were wrong, by all means at
tack them. There can be no objection TO
that. But in all candor we ask, what
other than the bigol's answer is it to sim
ply apply to him the unpopular names Of
Intidel and Abolitionist
And here we want to ask our neighbor
why he uses the latter term to designate
Mr.. ScHURz and his coadjutors. After
what the editor has said it would be un-
courteous to intimate that perhaps il was
because the name carries with it preju-
dice. Mr.. SEIZURE, and his countrymen
generally, are Republicans. not Adolf
tionists. They Go not propose to abolish
Slavery anywhere, unless in their own
States. but only to prevent its further
extension over the public domain. They
are therefore pot Aboliiionists. any more
than JEFFERSON, and MADISON, and WASH
,sGyos were Abolitionists, and our neigh
Dor cannot, with fairness, apply that stig-
ma to them. Nor will he find it neces
sary to argue against murder. and arson,
and general violence. for these men teach
no such doctrine. That is a man of straw
Of the editors own setting up, and it is
no great deal of feat for him, therefore,
20 knock it down again. u.
We don't know that we shall thihAit
necessary to discuss this question any
further. We probably shall not. Our
ncighbor says. however, that whenever
occasion presents be shall comment. as
he sees fit, upon the principles Of the
Republican party. That we shall like to
have him do, and only object, in this
case, that he did not do it, but confined
himself to attacking the theological views
Of few Of the party,