Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1868-01-23

The Rev. DR.. Howe, of Columbia, is said II
have demolished Ariel in a single column of tn,
Southern P-esJyte,lan. This Reply, however, i
not general one but takes up the question 81
far only as it is question Of philology aud as fa
as it goes is by far the most able and satisfactory
answer that has appeared. But it is not the phi
loogca aspect of the discussion that has impressed
itself most wildly upon the public mind.
The Rev. Mr. Girardeau has delivered, in Charles
ton, and probably has published Reply to Ariel
but we have not read it. We judge somewhat o
its tenor by the stated fact that Mr. Girardeau pur
sues the same line of argument as Optician ha!
done. We have read Optican.
The last Reply to Ariel that we have seen is en-
titled Speculum by Optician. Thewriter- younl
clergyman it is said, of the upper portion of thi
State-is not wanting in selfreliance but enter.
upon his task with full assurance of victory, anG
his tone from the outset is that of contempt for
victim. This over-confdence is rather misfor
tune in the general ISSUE Optican scorns to argue
against his opponents propositions, but ridicule:
and berates them; and uses parity of reasoning te
illustrate their absurdity. Argument would have
satisfied thinking mind better
Optician makes grand flourish which is meant
to utterly annhilate Ariel in citing the case of the
Eunuch treasurer of the Ethiopian Queen Candace
whom Phillip converted, as told in the 9Th chapter
of Acts. Optician assumes that the Eunuch was
negro, because he came from Ethiopia and, claims
that the instance Of soul-owning negro annhiates
Ariel's opinion to the contrary. He wakes facet
Gus, satirical, ironical rhetorical; and remarks
(showing his estimate of the point just made) thai
1T would seem work of supererogation to 60 any
farther into the examination of this pamphlet II
Long live Optician!
But Optician has come to grief upon this pet an
initiation point
Everybody knows-and Ariel since his pamph
let was issued has published the fact-that this
same Ethiopian Treasurer was HcJre,0, and not O
negro at all because this Treasurer had gone up
to Jerusalem for to worship" and none but Jews
had any right to go up to worship at Jerusalem |
The discontinue of Optician upon this point is
complete.
We believe DR.. Winkler, Mr. Girardeau and Op
tician, all made this same point They all laid
heavy stress upon it. They all exulted over it.
They were in great travail about it, and have al
brought forth the wind.
As to the rest of the arguments used against A.
riel they are, for themo part, made under the
assumption that. Ariel is running counter to the
Bible whereas the true issue is about the negro.
The Bible can stand for ITSELF Our idea is that
these divines are putting up straw man in order
to achieve an easy conquest, ignoring the essential
position of Ariel.
Ariel gives notice that he is preparing new
edition of his book and then, doubtless, we shall
have more comic illustrations of going it blind.
We desire to state distinctly that we do not en-.
dorse Aricrs proposition that the negro has nc
soul. We believe the contrary-that the negro
has soul And better one it is too, than some
white men have.