The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1879-04-05
RICHMOND. VA, April 4, 1879.


DIR. RufIncr's Promised Card.
RICHMOND. Va, April q, 1872.
TO the Editors of tie Dispatch:
IN nv card OF the I'd instant state that
explained the matter therein referred
to in an article which appeared three years :,
a-o. The article, being OF an eccleSlastlcai
cast. was published first in the Centrdt
presbvteri0a in April, 1876, and lmmedi-
otely copicd into the Richmond Enquirer.
II was addressed to DR.. Dabney, and was
column in length. must content myseI'
however, with some extracts from H. US 1oi-
lows:
81 know of no way OF introducing my
views better than by sketcbing the history
~ NV owr mind on this subject, and mas
much as the Ego is now fully out, there
NAV be no indelicacy in telling little more
obout him. sometimes say that nave
been lifelong advocate OF puhiic schools !;
which IS nearly true, but not quite. MY
father. although Virginian OF the fourth
generation, was. as you know. German
nv blood mot Yankee y, and be brought
me I'D in the faith of Fatheriand-the faith
OF Luther and Zwinslc, OF Calvin and
Knox, the faith OF almost every Pro.
I,estant State and nation on both sides OF
The ocean-yiZ., that for the soul to be
without knowledge is not good and that
the kingdom Of Christ and the klnSdom OF
Caesar were both so concerned in The tram
ing OF the young that both should give it
their care and their money, rs well as SIR
IN pnrentS-the original and responsible
nsriv. 49, When I entered
The ministry in 1913 our famous Presbyte-
rian parochiaI.sclnol system bad possession
of the Church, and, like good servant, at
once became interested in ecclesiastical ed
ucation; but my devotion TO this sys:
tenn was very short, and never for
one moment fully agreeable either to my
| Judgment or my feelings. l went from the
| chaDaincv OF the University OF Virginia to
church in Philadelphia, which was then
our ecclesiastical metropolis. My church,
of 1900 sittlngs, broke down my health,
and resigned in less than two years, and
returned to Virginia in 1858. My Older
friends will remember, perhaps sorrow
fully. that whist IN Philadelphia began q
war on what I then regarded rs mar
row and bigotcd oligarchy, which! was
trying to enSlaye the clergy and secuarlze
The Church; and this theory OF Church edu-
cation was one Of the inStrumentallties for
doing the work. And you remember,
Brother Dabney, that about that time there
was IL pretty formidable southern rebel.
lion against that centralzation OF Church
power, and that soon after my return to
Virginia DR.. Stuart Robinson and your col
league. DR.. Peck, aided by Messrs. Breckn-
ridge and Bocock, Dabney and Ruffner. &c,
&c, established the Ishmaelitish Critic in
Baltimore, and what lively time we had
No two OF us agreed upon all points, but
we all were agreed upon this: that we meant
to think for ourselves in matters OF Church
policy. IT,
"Well, the story is too long to I've told in
full; but during the fight had the most
singular mental episode OF my life. While
spending the night with the late Major
Robert Grattan, Of Rockingham county
YOU remember his strong INTELLECT was
stating to him my objections to Church cdu-
cation. He replied. substantially: Your
reasoning is perfectly sound, and 1t
applies equally to State educotion.' never
had thought so. but was in humor that
night to be convinced, and here confess
that Robert Gratian convinced me that
| Church and State education were Identical,
and that it was my duty, as then active
| warrior, to attack State education as was
attacking Church education, and try to
bring society hack to the primitive
way OF individual effort, or nothing.
went home and Immediately wrote
out the arguments used by Mr.. Grattan,
and sent the piece as contribution to
the Critic. The article was anonymous,
and perhaps nobody but DR.. Robinson ever
knew the author. 1t would be great folly
| in any one belonging to our generation to
be INVITING his neigbbor on Inconsistency
OF opinion in regard to public affairs du-
ring the last twenty years; but | sus-
pect X you had known had done this thing
you would have battered me with it before
now. But maybe not. Somt body attacked
the niece in the next number OF the Critic,
and could not say word in reply for by
that time was back, or nearly back, to my
old position, out Of which l have never
budged from that day to this.
"In 1861 think it was, the question of
having public free-school system in Vir-
ginia was brought up for debate in the
Franklln Society, OF Lexington. prepared
myself carefully, and made notes OF my in
teRded speech. Those notes l now have,
and when was elected to my present office
four years afterwards they were OF service
in preparing an argument which l sub
mitted IN thirty days after my election. /
was opposed to establishing Il school sys.
tenn until the true PEOPLE OF the State should
come into possession of the government;
| but the body OF this speech was as strong
! in favor of public free education as l Was
capable Of making it,"
The answer referred to was not in the
| Critic, but in pamphlet. The accuracy of
10y recollection as to the effect Of the argu-
ments OF Mnjor Robert Grattan upon my
mtGd is strikingly corroborated in letter
whSch have Just received from his son,
Captain Charles Grattan, who says: &c You
had frequent occasion to be at my fathers
house. and on these occasions, among other
subjects discussed, the one OF State educa-
ton was perhaps the most prominent. You
and my father took opposite sides-he
against and you for. was an interested
listener It's q boy, and thought nv father
had the best Of the argument, and that you
were at times almost persuaded" -.
The debate In the Franklin Society OF
Lexington occurred May II, 1S66-three and
] half years before the,present Constitution
was submitted to the people. The exact
form Of the question was as follows:
els it advisable for the State OF Virginia
| a, this time to adopt system OF public free
seaoolS?" I '> .,
Yhe words sat Nts time" rendered it
proper for sll OF US to vote in the negative,
as We did; but, nevertheless, took occa-
sion to express my views fully in favor OF
public free schools. The original full notes
from witch spoke may now be seen in
my Office. They would serve me we'll for
ssseech at tits time. The late brilliant Col.
epel james w. Massie bitterly opposed me
On that occasion, although he afterwards
became convert to the system. W ~. ,t-a
waulG not have troubled the public
with this matter, but for my official connec-
ton with zoe subjeci, and the fact that on
more than zoe occasion IL has been broadly