Bradford reporter. [volume] (Towanda, Pa.) 1844-1884, 1866-08-02
TO THE HON. EDGAR CoWAN.

DEAR SIR trust you will not take it
aniss III me, if, III frank, and not unfriend-
Iy spirit, | anlmadvert in general way,
Ou your present political position l am
constrained to this from sense of duty,
aud not so much on your account, as that
If others over whom your political action
has influence | take this step the more
freely too, because, like yourself, | am an
old Wing, and, if your position on the du-
ties Of the hour is right, | have very much
mistaken the early teachings imbibed i'll
tie whig party.
Allow me to premise further, by saying,
that | have read with care most Of your
late speeches, and that they fail to satisfy.
As forensic displays, they are doubtless
good, evincing comprehensive intelligence,
apness and power, but to me, they appear
to lack conscience. They are the able
lawyers pleas for the acquittal of those
whom he knows to be guilty, and, especial
iy is this the case of that on the Civil
Rights Bill 1t is logical and eloquent, IN
deed, has all elements OF the sklllful deba-
tor, but it is deficient in soundness. The
Just constructions of the law are over
looked. while the constrained and improba-
''' ait uCli up W fIC"i anu IO OiiS EniiO"S
better than yourself that the provisions Of
all statutes are liable to perverSion that
peyersion is unfair, and that if we wait
for perfection in human laws, we will new
er have any.
In your reply to Mr. Howard, and against
the proposition to amend the Constitution,
it seems to me, your logic is greatly at
fault and my sole object in referring to
this, is, to show you how far estray a delu-
sion may lead even the ablest. For, | am
almost certain, you would not assume a
position so untenable, if zeal for your wrong
course did not blind you.
You hold, in that speech, that we should
make no effort to keep the Southern people
from getting into power again, and that
there is no danger to be apprehended from
them because common interest VIII keep
them in order. Now why does not the In,
tcrest which all have il society, keep
down crime and why did this common III
tereSt not keep the Southern people III or
der before They had as much interest IL
peace before they made war, as now, yet
thcy did not preserve it. What ground
therefore, have you for saying they will no1o.
Again If, as you say, it is wrong t(
protect ourselves against repetition o.
southern folly aud wickedness, it must b'
wrong in society to punish crime to protec
itself According to this theory, 1t you
corn and horses are stolen, it is wrong II
you to lock your premises in order to Sc
cure your possessions You insist on II
dat it is not right to punish the thief, ant
still "A greater wrong to hinder his depre
dations Is this not queer logic to come
from a lawyer and a United States Sena
Tor? And if it is not blind theory, ! an
at loss to know what it is.
In assuming that the majority in Con
grcss alone are responsible for the radical
ism which obtains il the country, you max
a grave mistake Ninetean-twentieths o
the republicans of the nation, arc more e1
IRENE on what you call radcalism, than tn
congressional leaders Of whom you con
plain so much The people-and if yo
please, the old wings among them-wan
treason made odious by disgracetul pun
lshinent They want rebels kept out Q
franchises, and out of all influence in tn
government they labored so hard to destroy
and these views age constantly pressed VI
On republican Congressman. Ii they dl
regard, or oppose them, these members
congress will become as unpopular, WI
republicans, as you are. The reason, 10
Tor these extreme notions of the masses,
obvious, They see, daily, men punlshe
with extreme rigor for theft, arson and mu
der yet because these crimes have bee
carried on for years, and to fearful exte
BY the Southern people, there is dispoi
ton manifested in certain quarters, to