Daily national Democrat., 1860-12-28
9allp Natlonal 1emutrat
DR.. Scott and Onion snho.

since writin4eur article the other day, in
which We eallud8 to thelcharge Of placiarisa
against DR. Scott, in an anonymous writer
calling himself "Quien sabe," our attention
has been called to a reply by the Do or
which was published by the Union. 1t A but
justice to say that we think the Doctor has
clearedzhimsclf CT the charge. lie does not
deny having used ideas in his lectures on
"Other PLANETS" which may have been ad-
vauced before, but he did not claim original
ity for them, ii any other sense than that Of
the application which he made of them. He
did not affect to have himself measured tbe
distance to the sun or to have discovered the
planets. lie gave such statements on the sub
ject as had been furnished by well known as
tronomers
In regard to the charge of his having used
Dr. Cummings identical thoughts and Ian
guage, he proves thathe continually through.
out his work on Daniel, acknowledged his in
debtedness TO Dr. Cumming. There were
omissions of quotations in his publication in
places where they should have been, but this
wos the fault Of the proof reader
DIR. Scott says
The plan ofmy volume is altogether differ
ent from that of DR.. Cumming. His work is
mainly millenarian exposition of prophecy.
The order, arrangement and presentation are
all my own, using such materials as pleased
me, from the an hors whom | named at the
time, and urgs sdgmy hearers to procure and
read and espeq9lly DR.. Cumming. Il is inn
possible for dngmGn in his right mind 10 hare
designed any iWproper or dishonora5ie use of
an author that he used IN tbs ,cay Finally,
FMS matter va submitted to DR.. Cumming
himself by one of my fercest accusers. and
DIR. Cumming replied with witherine re-
buke, which, rs my Qccpser himself acknowl-
edged, fully justified Dr. Scott in the use he
had made of his lectures" DR.. CunD,iao
says;
"a very unnecessary severity of criticism
has fallen on DIR Scott. He alludes to my
lectures, commends them to the study of his
audience and having thereby evinced his ac-
qualntance with the volume, it was natural
that incidental ideas, which had any point
should beAdopted 10y him, and that the Ian
guage in which he first saw them clothed
should Yithout any deliberate appropriation
inevitab ~ adhere.
. The fact is, have no belief in originality
in the year lS54 1t is wonderful to notice
how very littleW it exists in modern litera-
ture. Tclndidly own, that in anything have
written have never aspired to be original
l employed such ideas as memory, and pretty
extensive reading, called up, and never stop
ped to inquire whether | was inventor or
mere unconscious vehicle, and my impression
Is that all have said or written has been bet
ter said or written before | was born Most
81 my writings were lectures or sermons de-
hvered from notes taken down in short hand.
corrected and printed. | never heald or read
any charge against the originality of my lee
ture on Daniel but have no doubt that dry
tollers who will take the trouble to read Bish-
op Newton, Sir Isaac Newton, Wintlaand
Fisk, may succeed to make out a good Ease.
An Independent minister in Hampshre wel
known to me, has engaged his full free in
this line in reference TO my lectures onAlira
Giles, and he traces an identity between some
OF them and Trench's. | stated in the preface
that was largely indebted to Olshausen and
Trench iofHaluable interpretations and solu-
lions OF difficulties. Trench takes largely
from Olshausen. l have taken ideas, though
not to my knowlenge, a single sentence from
both But ! dare say, a careful analysis
might detect more than was aware of. Nv
design in preaching and writingis is to win souls
impress the conscience, and unfold Gods Ho-
ly Word and any attacks on my originality
] take as compliments to the force of truth.
which thus receives as sort of consensus from
man, and were there less personal jealousy in
critics-which like poets, belong to the irri-
fd6le genus and more of earnest desire to see
truth yindicated there would be less of such
trihng.
81 am deeply indebted to the vigorous wrir
tiers OF your great country but even some Of
them could be brought in more guilty than
DIR. Scott. 1t is eminently puerile to select a
few sentences from long lecture, and on the
strength of such collection bring in DR.
Scott plagiarist. | know nothing personal
ly, nor by writing, of the clergyman in ques.
tion, and nothing more of the dispute than
what have seen in Norton and some other
papers bnt | feel obliged by his commenda-
tion Of my volume on Daniel which has real
ly nothing to commead it but the earnest con-
victions it expresses, and the direct and intel.
ligent language in which old truths are con-
veyed."
This is copied from Dr. Cummings letter, as
published in the Presbyteran Herald. of
Louisville, and all the other foregoing facts
are well known and fully admitted by all who
made themselves acquainted with this contro-
versy six years ago. They are a complete
and triumphant vindication from the charge
which the writer in the Union has raked up
again either through ignorance or malice.
1nE FuGTIvE SLAVE LAw.--The second
section of the fourth article of the Constitu-
tion of the United States, contains the fol-
lowing clause:
mo person held to service or labor in one
State, under the laws thereof, escaping into
another, shall, in consequence of any law or
regulation therein, be discharged from such
service or labor, but shall be delivered up on
claim Of The nnrIN 10 whom such snrNine nr