Delaware State journal and statesman., 1862-03-11
{ Communicated.
/" Emancipation in Delaware.
FRIEND EcKEL

|
From your announcement some
days ago. that you had ON file u communica-
tion from b. in reply to G. s. In on the subject
Of Emancipation, | expected legal argument.
My knowledge of l.. whom, for many years
hud regarded as sound lawyer, arguing his
causes fairly, and usually without resort to c'dp
traps, aud the drqumeAfUm at h1niiRtBl induced
me to believe that he would conhne himself 10
the legal questions involved in my communica
tion. | took up your Journal Of the 2lst inst,
therefore, expecting to he treated to nh argument,
divested Of personalities, and unjust and ungen-
erous insiuuations | was sadly disappointed
lie has fallen into the same vicious mode of
treating those questions, that characterized the
etiusons of q l.bertas !" indeed with greater
degree of culpahility. in thnt he knows better !;
has better disciplined mind; aud is much
sounder lawyer Mir u, does not notice e. s.
L. in terms, in his communication and but for
your announcement, that u. would reply to my
argument, could only infer that he intended to
do So lie begins by remarkng 1" There Is au
article in your last paper under this caption
| (Emancipation) calmly, nnt we'll written, but
| with a strange mixture Of loyal aud patriotic
sentiments and just and sensible premises, with
| disioydl aud secession wOrE VI dggamsAt, and Of
course false conclusions"
Now, Sir, if BIS object he truth and justice,
aud the ascertainment Of constitutional law
why nsk, ia all eandor, does B walk out Of
his way to denounce the article of G. S. l.. as
containing disloyal and secession words OF argu-
ment 2 And this too, in "A truly loyal patriotic
sheet; and before ii truly loyal and patriotic
people? Is ii because he has purpose in il
ls il because he would arouse the preiudices OF
oyal people against .. 8 |.
Such personalities, Sir, in my case are mol
only utterly untrue. but they hre absurd aud
simply ridiculous | nm happy to know my re
cord, rs loyal, patriotic man. il before th'
people Of Delaware, ] AIN content to abide theil
sober judgment Such grovellng, personal ap-
peals to the passions, and prrjudices of the peo
Pile, in an article protesting 10 be n legal nrgn
ment-0ny proves that B. Is not content to res
his case upon such an argument; and by resort
ing to such unworthy appeals, fairly confesse'
/ 10 a defeat.
! have been, Sir, MS l said sadly disappointe,
} in this article OF b. A more unawyer like pro
ducti0n have seldom seen. II IL even wOrs
than that of Libertas :" and that is saying
great deal. If we were arguing upon the ques
, ti0n of slavery in the abstract, as IN origna
question, affecting morals and sound natioDa
policy, then, much that B. has said would b.
appropriate. Ii we were discussing the pro
priety, expedency and sound policy of emanci
pating the slaves in constitutional and sal
mode in such mode as has been adopted in al
the free States where slavery has been abolished
then probably, my views might coincide wit
those of b. But we are discussing the uncou
! stitu,ional character OF the Emancipation bill
And here beg to assure b. and =" Libertas !
aud all those who choose to decIaim in the sam
vicious mode they have adopted, that ] am nc
likely to be convinced by "irritatiDg epithetH 0
allusious;" !" or irODical compliments )" or b
"ill natured sarcasm" Appeal to my judy
ment, produce your legal, constitutional argu
ments, cite your authorities, convince me Of an
error, and no man will more readily aoknowledg
his error, than l will
J But D. not only indulges in this vicious mod