The weekly Louisianian., 1872-08-24
CLARK ON SUMNER.

4. CLARK ON SUMMER
- & B
. We have assigned q number o
columns of to-aays paperto he re
production Of an able and length,
address OF Peter H. Clark Esq, O
Ohio, on the Sumner, Grant ant
Greeley question.
While agreeing i'll the main will
Mr.. Clark, there is q very great diff
ference between our views in rela'
ton to the course pursued by Mr.
FSumner, and the treatment he
should receive at the hands ST col.
ored men, because accepting Mr.
Clark's bitter and denunciatory Ian
guage as asample Of what Mr.. Sum.
ner merits, there would be little
difference between Benedict Arnold
ana MI. sumner.
It is unfortunate for MI. Sumner
that Mr.. Clark does not CUSTOMARY
ly denounce people, because his
wrath long penS up, has acquired a
virulence and an intensity that ridic-
u!ously exceeds oil tho necessities
and proprieties Of the occasion. Let
us look a little into his accusations.
Mr.: Sumner is called "a disappoint-
ed and embittered politician whose
wrathful gall &c." and as such un-
deserving of either admiration, ap-
plause, Or following. Our belief OF
AIr. Sumner is that he is as consci-
entious in his present course as he
has ever been, and we donot believe
that he is capable Of wilfully lead
ing the people, for whom he has SO
long and Extraordinarily labored
to emancipate and make free citi-
zens OF, into the pro-slayery fold.
There is nothing but tho merest
s%uppositions and speculations of
politicians on which to found any
such charge, and we had thought
that MI. Clark would have required
the clearest and completest evidence
OF MIR. Summers d~egeneracy, before
his voice would be lifted up in de-
nunciation of him. But instead of
this we find him, while. noticing
that nobody had denounced" MIR.
Sumner making indecent haste to
take the conceit out of the Senator
by attempting to even rob him of
the praise due him for the work he
has performed in the anti-slayery
cause.
This effort of MIR. Clark we re-
gard as simply and purely one of
the worst samples of ingratitude
We have recently witnessed. MI:
never claimed to be par
"the Sampson whose
mighty grasp has overthrow the
of the temple Of slavery" but
his services for q generation, his
untiring efforts in the Senate to Sc
protection and equal rights
have commanded the admiration of
until the name of Charles Sum-
her became the synonym for patri-
otism, philanthropy, and true great
ness; it is therefore unjust to repre-
sent Mr.. Sumner as egotistically
claiming what Mr.. Clark and thous-
ands Of others had SO freely con-
,eded to him. Others have done
much, aye very much, all honor to
and the revered names of the u
patriots mentioned will ever be re-
and uttered with respect
md gratitude. [
With reference to adopting Mr.. !.
summers advice we have no issue
With Mr.. Clark; we do not propose
0 accept the advice of MI. sumner;
'ur estimate Of Mr.. Greeley is diff ]
orent from his; we do not see the
of Greeley's administration,
s MI. Sumner docs, and we shall
|ot attempt to "fy from the ills we I
ave to those we know not Of" we
re supporting Grant and Wilson. {
;ut we are not denouncing ,emphati- Q
not repudiating, Charles
'umner, until we have better end a
lore substantial evidence of his del c
and treachery than we have
ct seen. We take pleasure in civ t
ar readers Mr.. C]ark's speech, but t
@ could not do this without our q
xception to his remarks on Charles t
umner. q