THE MEW YOKE TEESS. EDITORIAL OFINIONS OF THE LEADING JOURNALS UrCN CURRENT TOPICS. COMPILED XVFRY DAT FOR I.VENIKO TRLFOKAPH Shall the Voter of the North Ilnve J-jqiial Mights with the Voter of the . South I From the Tribune. One ol the great questions to Dp decided at the Congressional elections this lull, 13 whether the Voters of the North shall obtain equal rights with the voters of the South, or whether they are satisfied that the abolition ot slavery shall even Increase the superior rights which the voters of the Southern States have thus tar en joyed under the Constitution. The matter is so plain that, properly presented, It cannotjfail to be understood by the dullest Intellect. According to the la w of the 23d of May, 1850, it was enacted that the number of Representative in Congress should be 2;i3; that the representa tive population (which means the whole num ber ot free persons, excludine Indians not taxed, with the addition of thrcc-hlths of all other per sous) determined by tno census of that, year, and thereafter, bbould be divided by said num ber 233, and that tne quotient so loond should be the ratio ot representation for the several States. The ratio thus ascertained under the census of I860 was 124,183, aud upon this basis the 233 Representatives were apportioned amon the States. Tlie number was, however, in creased by the act ol March 4, 18U2, from 233 t 241, by allowing one additional Representative to each ol the lollowinir States: Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont. According to this apportionnient.the Northern and Southern States had the following number of Congressmen: KOUTUKKN STATUS, Calilornia SNewJoisoy 5 Connecticut 4 Now York 31 Illinois 14 Oaio 1J Indiana 11 Oegon 1 Iowa 6 lVunHylvauia 24 faufias 1 Khodo Island 2 iaine 5 Vermont 3 Massachusetts lo Wisconsin 6 kucliiKau 6 Minnesota 2 Total New Hampshire a hOUmmiN STATKS. Alabama 6 Missouri Arkamas 8 North Caiolma. . . .Delaware 1 ;oiith Carolina... Florida 1 lonuessoe Georgia 7, Texas Kentucky Hil'lio Virginias .150 J.UU1MHIIH b Maryland 6 Total 85 Mibaissippi 6 Now that slavery is abolished, the three-fifths rule has, of cours', to cease, and the new ap portionment has either to bo mado upon the voting white) population, as the Congressional amendment provides, or upon ttie total popula tion, as will be the case if the amendment is rejected and the Johnson party have a majority In the noxt Congress. Saould the amendment not be adopted, and the 241 members, provided tor by the act ot 1802, divided among the States according to their total population, the South would gain nine members and tho North would loso nine. The ratio of representation in this case would be 129,245, aud the representation of the Northern and Southern States iu Congress would be as follows: HOHTHERN STATUS. Calilornia 3 New Jersey 6 Connecticut 4 New Yoik 29 Illinois 18 Ohio 18 Indiana 10 Oregon 1 Iowa 6 I'ennst Ivama 22 Kansas 1 JtuoUn Inland 2 Maine 5; Vermont. 8 Massachuset. 9 Wisconsin 6 Miotiiguu . , , ftliuueota New Hampshire . Total.... ...147 southern states, Alabama 7 Missouri 0 Arkansas 3 North Carolina 8 Delaware 1 Florida 1 outn Carolina . . . 5 . 9 . 5 .12 Tennessee Georgia 8 Kentucky 9 Louisiana 6 Maryland 5 Mistti sippi, Q : Texas litis Virginias.... Total 94 It will be seen that iu this case the States of Ifbuois, Indiana, Iowa, Massachusetts, aud Ohio would each lose one, and the States of New York and Pennsylvania each two. On the other hand, the States of Alabama, Georgia, Ixiuisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia would each pain one. As the total voting population Of the Northern States is 18,652,776, aud of the Southein States 8,026,700, this would give in the Northern States one member for a voting population ot 126,8iiJ, and in the Southern Slates one member for a votiuer population of 85,496. Those, therefore, wbo oppose the amendment, or who, at the approaching elec tion, vote for Congressmen ot the Johnson party, thereby vote that a voting population of 126,889 in the North thah have as much power as b5,496 Southerners, the immense majority of whom are unrepentant Rebels. The Constitutional amendment, upon which tho admission of the Southern States to Con gress is made dependent, and with it the Re publican party, insist that a voter in the North ern States shall count as much as in the South ern States. It, accordingly, the voting popula tion be made the basis of representation, the ratio of representation would bo 111,685, and the Northern and Southern States eutitled to the lollowingjiiumber of Congressmen: KOUTIiBRN STATES. California 7 New Hampshire 3 Connecticut 4 Sow Jersey 6 l.liuois 15 New Vork 05 ludiuua 11 Ohio 19 Iowa eOroeoii 1 Kansas 1 1'eniiBy.vanla 24 Maine 0 Kliodo Island 2 Massachusetts 12 Vermont 8 iliouiiian 7 Wisconsin 7 Minnesota 2l Total 171 SOUTH EUN STATES. Alabama 4 Ali-siss.ppi 2 Arkansas 3 Aliusour 9 Delaware 1 Aonh Carolina 5 lunda 1 1 South Carolina 2 Georgia 61 Tennessee 7 Kentucky 81 lexa 4 Louisiana 4 1'ut) Virginias 9 Marvland 5 Total 70 It will be Keen that in this case Illinois, Maine, Michigan, New Jersey, and Wisconsin will gain one representative eiicb, Massachusetts two, and New York four. Men of New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, let it be well un derstood by every voter in your State, that the Republican Congressional ticket means equal potitical rights for the voters North and South, and that tne ticket of the Democrats and the Johnson party means superior rights of the Southern : voters. Kvery man who votes the op position ticket thereby consents to have lesser rights than a voter in the Southern States; while every supporter of the Repubucun ticket insists that the Union men of the North shall have at least equal rights with the late Rebels. Is It possible that tho issue between two such tickets is doubtful? Will the South Accept the licat Attalu . able Term From the Herald. Very naturally the radical Copperhead organs aud the radical ulgperhead organs are acting together in opposition to the conservative Con' stltutioniil amendment, just as they aided aud abetted each other before the war and during the war. Wo expected no lesa than this when Ve rescued the amendment from the oblivion to "which it had been doomed by the radicals of both parties, and placed It clearly before the country as a vital, positive isnue. It Is because these radicals so bitterly odiioho It that the fuasses of tho people are becoming every tfaj THE DAITA , -KVENING TELEGRAPn. rmLADELPmA, SATUKDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, I8CC. more enthusiastic In Its favor. They remember that tt was passed tbrouah Congress by con servative Republican votes at d in spite of the open hostility ot the ultra radicals, like Mr. Than. Stevens, and they know that its adoption by the youth now would be another great triumph over tliooc extremists who desire to keep the Union divided in order to further their partisan plans at the text Presidential election. For this reason the more the radicals on both sides say acrainst the amendment, the moro the people ffnd in It to endorse. The radical Copperhoad papers denounce the Constitutional amendment bs "a sham, a swin dle, and a lie." The radical nignerhoad paoers treat it In the tame temper, and declare that "no leading Republican In Ci.ngress means to admit the ten waiting States simply on the adoption of that amendment." This is the opi nion of the extremists, and everybody knows that it is worth practically nothing. We ask the Southern States whothfr the opposition of the radicals Is liot one of the strnngost arguments to Induce them to ratity the amendment at once? They have been shown that the Constitutional amendment was adopted in Congress against the wishes of the radicals; they have seen that General Grant approves it; they have been In formed that the delegation from the Cleveland Convention of soldiers and sailors endorsed it in their address to the President, aud they have noticed that the Pittsbiug Convention of sol diers and sailors embodied it In their platform, and lorced Major-General Butler to report it, iu spite ol his recent ill-disguised hostility to so pacific a measure. Tbe prompt admission of Tennessee has proved to them that a State has only to ratity tho amendment to be at once received into the Union. Here, then, is a plan of iruiucdiiile restoration w hich is sanct oned by all the true friends ot the south and opposed by all her ene n.ies. Why should it not be accepted IT Why do the Southern States hesitate and delay? I3 it harder to be deprived ot a few representa tives 111 Congress by denying the negroes the fianchise than to be deprived of representation altogether? Is it more grievous to give votes to the- negroes, if that alternative be chosen, than to keep all the white men irom the ballot-box ? Will the South accept the best attainable terms as condensed in this amendment, or will the blood and burning policy of Parson Brownloff be preferred by Southern statesmen ? We tell the South that the conservative peo ple of the North are a unit npon this amend ment. It has been ratified by the Legislature ot New Jersey, which is the only State about whose ratification there had been any doubt. In excluding leading liebi ls froui odice, aud forever repudiating the Rebel debt, it gives just those guaiantees for our future peace; and secu rity that the North inexorably demands. Ira provisions in reeurd to the apportionment of representation a fleets the Northern States as well as the Southern. If we accept it, why cannot the South ? The time has passed wtien Northern voters will submit to see the negro counted as a man or three-tilths of a mau when Representatives are apportioned, but treated as a nonentity when the votes are taken. One theory or the other must be abandoned. Either the negro must not be counied, or he must vote. We should like to hear a single reasonable argument, against the justice of this provision. The South ought to be williim to accept it even it it were not a condition ot re union. Under the circumstances it is not only a con dition, but it is the best attainable condition. It the Southern people wait for something better they will be forced to take nomethiug worse. Let them reluse this amendment, whih leaves the question of negro sull'rage with the States and the next move of the radicals will be to force upon them unconditional negro sullragf, wub the alternative of continued exclusion, or perhaps the baonet. The South was not satis lied with tho Missouri compromise. The same error must not be repeated now. In case a more radical Consress is elected this fall, tho mild terms of the Constitutional amendment will be superseded by more harsh conditions, and then what can the South do but submit? There can be no second rebellion, and we no longer care lor the bombast and brageadooia that used to aflright our politicians, lint if the Southern States ratify this amendment their lepresentatives will be' at once admitted to their seats in Congress, aud will hold the balance of power. On the one side are incalculable evils; on the other a palpable advautage. Tne enemies ot the South are those who urge the reject'on of the amendment; the genuine friends of the South urge the acceptance of the best attain able terms in order to a speedy restoration. What will the South decide to do ? Her fate is in her own ht.nds. The Democratic Party. From the 1 imes, The Times of yesterday chants a requiem over tho Democratic party, most plaintive in tone, but must sad y out of tinw. la thocou so ot its retreat lrom the truly national and patriotic position w. ieu it took up alter tho Philadelphia Conven tion, that journal repeats most of the meaningless abuse ol UemooiaUi which it indulgod iu during the war. There 13 the same careless coutouudiuir of government with administration, the stm" foolish chargo of sympathy with tho Keb llion. tho same groundless accusation ol partiality toward slavery, can tho Times be iu earnest in declaring the Demo cratic party to be, or to have ever been, 'void ot the spirit ot progress, of reform, and of political liberty?' All gits traditions before the war oroai.no that spirit. All itscouiso durinsr tho war wae inspired by the passion for legitimate prodrugs, tor reguiatod icloi m, for true and constitutional ireedom. In its law-abiding position and its resolute action no w, is to bo lound tho ouly hopo of roal Union aud na tional salety. What does It avail to taunt that groat imiy uu mo uiiB uih.es 01 inuso more 'extravagant nuu erring spirits ' wuom, as an organization, it never followed nor avowed? Will the daugnr whicn 1I10 Times deplores, 'from tho fanatical pa-siou-t ot extreme and reck ess men' among tbe Itenub leans, be conjured ay by all that stale railing against their opponents, which was exposed aud dori JeJ even curing tho heat ot the Kobolliou? li tho Times c a 1. not lind reasons or courage 10 meet the argu ments ot tho ladicals, it takes rofutro in a saie hut tri ml patiwo by raising old gh sts oi Demo rat o inischiel, lor tno take ot scolding them with spoils us oid and as empty." World. The "old ghosts of Democratic mischief" will not "down" for anybody's scolding. They will haunt the Democratic party and push Its leaders from their stools for many a long day to come. The evil that political parties do lives after them; and the course pursued by the Democratic party, as a political organization, during the Rebellion, will no more be forgotten than was the Hartford Convention forgotten after the war ol 1812. It Is idle to claim tbat the party did not oppose the Government but op.ly the Admin istrationthat it was not aiding the Rebellion but oniy "regulating" tbo war waged against it. The people, in such emergencies, draw no nice distinctions. They see the existence of the natiou at slake and the Government fighting to preserve it those who he(p the Government are its lriends those who do not are its toes. Tbat is their record, and they must abide by it. The record ot the Democratic party during the war in disloyal and unpatriotic. We speak not of individuals, but tho party in its organized action. Its conventions, State and National the action of its representatives tbe speeches of its otlice-holders and caudidates,the language of ite orators and its presses, were all calculated and intended to embarrass aud cripple the Gov ernmentnot to aid, support, and strengthen it in its lite and death struggle. The Demo cratic party opposed the drait. It denounced the arrest and imprisonment of spies and sy moa tui.ers with treason in the North, it made itself everywhere the champion and defender of those who, iu tho loyal States, sought to give aid and comiort to the Rebels iu the South. Vallandigbam, iu Ohio, was arretted, tried, and punished for dissuading soldiers from p ulisting, lor encouraging desertions, and tor other flagrant violations ot tho law, perpetrated in aid of tbe Rebellion; and the Democratic party of that State not only denounced his Etinishment as an act of tyranny, but made im the Democratic candidate for CoTn-nor thus distinctly espousing and indorsing his acts as their own. Governor Seymour, in this State, wrote a letter declaring, iu substance, that it was more important to put down the Government (or its treatment of Vallaudigham, than to put down the Rebellion: aud the Demo cratic parly made uiui their Governor. So it vas everywhere. The Democratic parly throughout tho North, in all its party action, took ground against . the Government, and practically and substantially In aid of Jhe Re bellion. We are quite willing to concede that tho P mocratic party sees its error now, and would gladly retrieve it. It began to repent immedi ately after the war was closed, . aud tiled to change its ground. The resolutions adopted at the Democratic State Convention last year were In tbe mam sound and patriotic such as com manded tbe assent of Union men. But Instead of acting with Union men, they clung to their own organization and strove resolutely to per petuate their party power. At Philadelphia they went a step further, and while accepting a declaration ot principles in substantial harmony with tho action of tbe Union party during tlie war, professed a willingness to lay aside all party projects, and join, under new auspiees and a new organization, with men of all parties to carry those principles Into practical effect. But no sooner did the State Convention meet than the old patty flag was run up, tbe old party lenders took command, and the old cralt, with all sail set. made straieht lor the old Demo cratic port. The Convention had not a thoii"ht bej ond parly success and the plunder to be thus cnioyed. The people understand this game and intend to block ir. They do not mean (o replace tho Democratic party in power. They will not re word it for its disloyalty, nor will they trust it with Interests to which in the past it has proved so faithless. It is with them not a question of argument, but of confidence. Tliev care nothing tor Demociat'c resolutions, speeches, profes sions, or promises they will not trust the De mocratic paity. The Woi id objects to an impeachment of the profession-, spint, and temper of the Democratic parry. But m wtm single instance has tnat party made itself the champion ofiny grea' re form? When lias it favored mcifsures tor puri ljinir society ot its evils for remedying great and flagrant wrongs for educating, ' assisting, and elevating the ignorant, tbe poor, and fhe degraded ? For a long series of years the Dem o cralic party has had absolute and undisputed sway 10 this city: in what beneficent statutes or institutions do we find the monument of its regard tor tbe morals, tho manners, or the peace aud pood order of this great community ? What has It done to ptotect society against drunken ness, profligacy, crime, vice, and misery in every form ? Is it not notorious that every effort made by those most solicitous lor the public welfare, for tbe suppression of vice aud immorality, meets its most lornudable foe In the Democratic party ? The city struggled for years against that party to secure a decent police, department. It was in the teeth of its most strenuous hostility that we secured a commission to protect newly landed emigrants iioni wholcsulu robbery, anil at the present time the Democratic party is putting ioi th all its energies to break dowu the Health Board and the Excise Commission, bv which alone we have any hope of protecting the com munity against tbe most fearful evils, physical and moral, by which great societies are ever aiinctcd. We certa nly do not misstate the case when we, ay that the Democratic party, in its orga nized political action, is the inveterate foe ot all moral and social progress aud elevation. It seeks always to use the vices of men, not to cure them. It panders to the wor.-t anpetites and passions, because it cau make theai" minis ter to its advantage. And in its political action, its impulses have been equally alien to the spit it ot freedom. Its temper towards the colored race has alwavs been narrow, illiberal, and cruel in sympathy with their oppressors, never with tbose wbo have sought their ele vation and advancement In a word, the Demo cratic party bus never sought anything higher or better than its own aggrandizement, li has never yielded to the impulse ot philanthropy, which, however mistaken thev mav nomctiiuea be, are always nobler than calculations of sel bsh advantage, as springs aud motives of public action. y Tne Dfinocrat'c party ha3 fallen behind the spirit and temper of tbe age. It, has lo-t the confidence of the intelligent, public-spirited, asp ring lovulty of the nution. And po long us it cl ligs to its old organization and its old tra ditions, it will liud rhat this confidence cau never be regained. Personalities iu Politics. From the Xativn. We have received from friendly sources letter-,, couched not always in respectful language, re presenting the error and even the sinfulness of our occasional strictures on men who represent ideus which we ourselves earnestly advocate, and are champions of causes which we with them hold dear. Without going into a detailed defense of our own ciiticisnis, w hich might be unsatisfactory to our correspondents, we will attempt to state tbe principle we have adopted lor our guidance, and have tried, possibly with out invariable or absolute success, to act on. In this country, where there is no standard of poli tical opinion fixed by authority, supported by government, or made venerable by tradition, but w here opinion, even on primary questions, is, by means ot debate and discussion, continually a-iuiikiuB, it is of first moment that ail political nuu social doctrines should be tried ou their merits by rational criticism. The party press, especially in paity time-, cannot be expected to do this, lor it is engaged in working up par ticular cases, iu meeting special emergencies, and in assailing or defending immediate points. It must, therefore, sink the fundamental to seme degree in ihe transient; must not be too nice m distinctions or over-tine in qualincatious; and, having to tarry ua is&ue, must bruig up at the moment ail tbe forces within reach, though in doing so it weaken for tbe time the strength 01 important posts. Hence it becomes the more urgent ouly ol the independent press to look aiter ti.cse prime interests, to take ideas at their essentiul value, to try principles by their weight iu the scales ol judgment, to w innow tbe wheat from tne than with which party discussions coer tbe mental sur.uce of the time, aud to contribute something, week by week, to the bum of rational reliet on which the community n.ust live and grow, if it is to live and grow ac cording to the law of its civilization. The office ot clear, candid, comprehensive, independent criticism, as judicial as it is possible to make it, cannot be held 111 too high esteem. It we cannot have it, we cannot have well-grounded political convictions, but shall be toru up from the roots by evcrj convulsion of party passion. It is admitted tbat such criticism of principles cannot be carried on w ithout some criticism of the neu wlw represent aud maintain them. Personalities are necessarily involved in our politics, lor it is often extremely dillicult to separate ideas from the peculiarities ot the men who iaitiate or sustain them. Those pecu liarities are not seldom an element iu the com position ot the ideas, so that we are unable to decide what a doctrine is worth till we have rendered account ot tho characteristics ot its exponents, in so tar us they are involved in the question at issue. If Mr. Wendell Phillips usstimes an air ot infallibility not always justi fied by the lacts rr arguments at his command, nopeisoual admiration ol him should tempi a lairmiud to put that feature out ot view. If Mr. TbaUdeus Stevens allows a passionate enthu siasm to mislead his judgment iu a case of vital concern, justice demands tbat such an element should be noted and allowed tor. It Mr. Charles Sumner permits his couvictions to run into dogmatism, and lends the undue lorce of a vehement temper to the momentum ot bis argument, the truth is more than Mr. Sumner; and he would be the last 10 desire that a respect lor his character, ability, or magnifi cent seivlce should blind anyone to the mis chief thut might follow an unnoticed flaw in his mental constitution. It Mr. Horace Greeley, in the heat of a momentous cau vass. gives undue license to his extraordinary power as a partisan writer, and mixes too much polemical animus with bis discussions, it is but lair that the pub lic should understand that too, and should learu to discriminate between the arguments of tbe thinker aud the "points" of the political leader. If it be urged that iu this way we iujure. the iutlueuce of the ablest and noblest leakTs, we reply that our purpose Is to estimate that Influ ence precisely, and reduce it within Its just dimensions. No leader should have an undue Influence throueh tbo force ol his personal magnetism: no man should have an illegitimate influence through the trick of his talent; no man, on one side or the other, should enjoy an influence through bis weaknesses or defects which he could not exert through his powers and virtues; and if the former conceal, displace, or counteract the latter, the public shoul 1 be saved irom such a misfortune by timely criti cism. The men we have mentioned will al ways exert, through tbeir ability, a merited and mighty influence, which the pruning-knife ot criticism will, instead ot impairing, help to make sound and wholesome lor permanent uce. Though even of such influence tho educators of the people should bo reasonably jealous, tor just so ar as it obtains sway it interferes with the indepi ndent investigation of opinions. But this critici' m of personal qualifications tbat we advocate as necessary to the uttaiimient 01 correct judgments is a very dtilereiit tiling liom the cut'cism ol private character that is reported to lor the compassing of party ends. That is as unjustifiable as the other is indis pensable. The moral character ot a man is rarely implicated directly, or within the scope of our observation, in his polit'cal or social opinions, and we hold it to be as unwise as it is unfair, unkind, and uncharitable to coniound qutstions of opinion with questions of purpose, intention, or motive. To say that a change of policy implies a change of heart; that the aban donment of a party on a temporary t-sue is equivalent to the desertion ol a great moral principle; that a mistake is a tall, and a blun Cer an apostasy ; t-. cull a mau a traitor, hypo critCj fool, knave, abandoned villain, aud whelp of sin because he does uot repeat the party creed word lor word, or tread iu hie the bee line of paity tactics, or consent to swallow the smallest grain of inference prescribed by the paity physicians is one of those outrageous absurdities which honest men caunot abide patiently; and the habit, so common as to be invariable among u, of abscribing baseness. meanness, avarice, cunning, ambition, and w hatever other turpitude can be imagined or, in default ol turpitude idiocy, lunacy, sot tc mug of the braiu not to political opponents merely , but to those who are but remotely suspected of being political opponents, calls for the severest condemnation ot right-minded men. No cause deserves to thrive that has recour.-e to persoual slander and random vituperation. No cause can be intelligently advocated ou those terms. A man's motives arc his own. Till he chooses to declare them, we are bound to give him credit tor good ones. No pariy monopolizes character. The pureft men John Newton, tor instance, or Las Caas - have committed terrible blunders, and still have remained pure men. Tho most seltish men have been saved irom blun ders by their astuteness, hut have been base men still. We h .ve our own deliberate opinion of Andrew Johnson as a states man, administrator, politician, thinker, orator, and it is uot a high one. as all our readers know. Indeed, we may say, it could not well ; be made lower. Still, as a man, we believe him to vo honest in deeming himself a true lover of tbe Union, a him defender of the Constitution. u iuyi iiii-nu 01 leptioiieau uoertv, a cniltlipioil of popular rights. To call hiiii a Judas, a Mcphistophelcs, a "besotted sans-culotte," helps to 110 explanat on of his position; tLat is suffi ciently accounted for by bis temperament, birth, education, experience as a Tennesseean. That he is limited, coarse, passionate, aggressive, stubborn, fanatical, all can see, ahti all can un derstand why be cannot be anything else. That is our misfortune, but u is not bis sin. To say it, is simply to say v.lat his antecedents justify us ia saying; but it is not to asperse his motives or to blacken his character, ills character may be as good as any man's under bis conditions. It we may analyze Mr. Johnson without calumniating him, and denounce his policy without dooming him to tbe traitor's hell, bow much more easily can we do so in the case of Mr, Beecher, whose antecedents are sodiuercnt, whose temperament is so much finer, whose character is cast in so tuuen grander mould, whose history lias been written in onoti Umi. mm ifttcrs, whose career has been so magnifi cent as pieacber, thinker, reformer, man, whose sympathies have been so true, whose purposes have been soslendtust, whose words have been so outspoken, so unequivocal, so consistent, ou all tbe gieat issues of Hie generation. We have said before, aud we say again, that in our judg ment he has committed a grave mistake, most uniortunate and mischievous to himself and to the country. He is virtually giving aid and cotntort to his oid enemies, aud is leudin" the immense weight of his name, we will not say ot his character, to the cause which lie has been lighting grandly lor twenty-five years. Shall we declaie, then, that he is a "lalse clergy man," that "he belongs to that class oi ministers who suppose that in oider to be a politician it is advisable to turn their backs on morals aud re ligion,'' that "be is a loolisu preacher who w ishes to make out a case," that "he is not so shallow that he altogether forgets to be knavish," tbat in discussing the condition of the freed nien, he shows "the extreme of beartlessness nnd baseness ?" That were a poor compliment to human nature. Then history goes tornothing, and character goes lor nothing; the record of a lifetime may be blotted by the misconception ot an hour; a foolish word is to out weigh a w hole career of deeds; and a splendid li n e, built up on earnestness, devotion, aud consecrated ability, is to be blackened and ruined by a Luriud loiter. What is the use of making a character tt the venom of partisan de traction can spoil it in a day, it vearsof strenu ous hie are not good ngaiiiot the foolish inter ente of a demagogue? It is an insult to intelligence to say tbat Mr. Beeehei's most unfortunate position can oulv be explained on tbe theory oi his personal iuti flehty to his convictions. No doubt a man oi Bis influence has been soucht by men of the President's partj. whose mgenious representa tions had a momentary eUcct on a mind natu 1 ally disposed to listen to all fides of an argu ment, jealous 01 narrowuess, on its guard against its own bias, and j rone to give generous mtor pretations to opposing views. Then, again, Mr. Rtechcr is' rather a man of impulse than a man of intellect, a poet rather than a statesman, or politic.an, or philosopher. His opinions no more contain his feelings than his ledums coutam his opiuions. Such men always indulge 111 vagaries lrom tbe excess of their en thusiasm; they are fond ol straying oil' into side paihs, under tho lead of a fancy; but the very frequency ot their aberrations proves that thev ate sure of tiudiug the nigh road at any moment. Lut w bether this be so or not, it is not neces sary, and it 11 is not necessary it is not wise, to implicate the character of a powciiul man, or of a man uot poweriul in his political views, espe cially when political views are shitting their bearings as they do with us. Character is a per manent lorce, good for all emergencies aud needful at all times. We cannot atlord to play last and loose with it; if we do, we miss it iu the lime ot greatest need. The world will not be three months older before these very caluinnia tois will wish the calumny had never been ut tered, will be glad to enthrone the man tbey slandered in the highest seats of popu ar regard, and wHI be as irrational in culling in his personal influence as they mo now m ruling it out. Opinions piu-N, tactics niter, issues are dropped, views dis pone: but it Is 01 the utmost moment thut well earned personal iutlueuce should be carefully guarded and cherished: tor, whatever beaides mav be on the wrong side, tbat is ever on the r sbt. Itisihe supi erne of folly to kill what may nelp a K' ni ration iu order to secure point lor a paragraph. Is our position, then, a plain one? For the sake of impartial criticism, in the interest ol i-ober principles, that questions at issue may bo kept well defined und clear, that doctrines may be argued on Hair merits, that injustice may be avoided, that personol reputation may be unscathed and personal honor respected, t'lat the right ol free di.-eusiou may be niuintaiued inviolate, und that tbe coniiiuiuitv niuy preserve reverence lor its great and good men, at the biime time that men 1. aru reliance on their own judgments, we enter our protest against the prevuleut lutroductiou 01 per sonalities into poltcs. It our politic-, are ever to become 'noble, the practice must b iibMitk'ued. Stusitive men, and the most set sitive men are apt to be the finest, will shrink 1 from tbe struggle wlih bullieS and bruisers, and will leave the conduct of public affairs to the 1 mob of unprincipled schemers. Already the habitual resort to personal vltimer&Unn nne. rates as a terror to fair mlndednesa, a a bo mly on hvpocrisv, as a bribe to apostasy; for noue but the bcbt can face it, and the best will not choose to face It. Every man has au interest in tho politics of this country. Every good man has a sacred interest in their nobleness, and they who make it their profession to have poli tics In their especial Charge should see to it that the good men who arc Interested in politics hive weight according to their goodness, and that good men who ar e not interested become bo. The White Feather. From the Independent. The National Committee of the Republican party huve issued au address to the American people. "The decree of a council," said Cotton Mather, "hnth no more force thau there is force in tbe reason ot it." With sorrow, we pronounce the Committee's address repugnant to the moral sense ot those American citizens who arc Inflexi bly determined uot to compromise impartial suffrage. This most solemn of reasons, there fore, confronts the Committee's address with condemnation. The country is in too critical a condition, tbe safety of Southern loyalists is too greatly Imperilled, the peace aud order of the luturc are too gravely threatened, to permit this address, so inadequate to the nreent situa Hon, to go forth as representing, as pledging, and particularly as Dinumg the radical narlv God grant that the great party of liberty shall piove braver tnanjit.t rjait-hcur.cd leaders ! Fellow-countrymen, let us consider. For eighteen mouths the dally topic of men's talk has been tbo reconstruction of tbe Uuiou. Unanimity ot opinion does not pievnil. Oppos ing plans divide the nation into opposing par ties, and subdivide parlies into opuosiug sec tions. The Republican party is divided between the advecates ot readnnssiou without securing the negro's polifical rights, aud the advocates ot reudunssion only alter the guarantee ol im partial sufirage. At (he first sound of the trum pet m this war of debate, we took our place under the banner ot equal rights. Wo loiupd the cause uot to desert it, not to betray it, not 10 compromise it, inn to light ror it till tne vie lory. it is a sacred cause; the cause of liberty and justice; the cause ot honor, magnanimity, and cnarit.v ; the cause of peace and good-will. The noblest men of (he nation are its champions; the noblest women are petitioners to heaven lor benediction i.poii it. In New England and oil tbe prairb p, bereaved futinlics, who are mourn ing with a proud grid over slain soldieis of liiierty, recoil in their heart, ot hearts at any less ample fruition of the wur than a settlement just, sate, and final. Tbat settlement must include tbe political equality 01 American citi zens, without ouc-tioniug God's wisdom in varying the colors of "the human face divine." Planting their leet on the one truo corner-stone of reconstruction, tbe radical party are not to ue duvcn irom it, not to be persuaded from it, not to lie ensnarod lrom it. Tbey may. or may not. be a majority of the lojal Nrth; the qucst.iou ot numbers remains to be settled by trial; but, whether they prove a tnajoiuy or minority, they are not made ot the hore ot cowards, and they will never surren der. Seeing ihcir opportunity, thev mean to seize it; knowing their Btiength, they meau to exercise it; believing in their caue, they menu to wm it. At this moment the sky of promise : t-:..i.. 1 . 1. . ...1 is unuuk who. it sacreu 111:111, wiicieiu we 01s- ceru anew Ihe golden emblem, "By this sign conquer." This journal aud its legiou of friends whom may God bless I -having taken this position from tbe beginning, are resolved to maintain it to the end. Thereioic, when the National Com mittee ot the Kepubltcau party unroll their otii t ial scroll, asking us to consent to a compromise ol principle, asking us to pledge the Republican voio of next November to u reeouHiructiou 011 the inadequate basis of the pending amendment, asking us to leave the negro's political rights not only unsecured, but undemanded, we can only exclaim, Heaven forbid ! Tue radical paity, both North aud South, regards the pend ing nuiendnieut as a proper measure a measure w h'ich it advocates w ith pleasure and earnest ness but it reeards it as no more adapted to a basis of reconstruction than would be a tariff bill, or a fishery treaty, or a neutrality law. Tbe mere amendment will not "reconstruct" anything; It will leave things as they are. It will not alter, one whit, the present relation of the white Rebel to ihe black loyalist. It holds out a faiut and far off temptation to enfranchise the blacks, just as the Constitution of 178S) held out, through its three-hf'tbs clause, a taint aud lar-ofl temptation to abolish slavery, slavery was not abolished under tbe mill iuilueuce of ttmptation, but under the strong Influence of compulsion; and the negro's euiranchiscmeut will not be achieved by such temptation, but by such compulsion. Accordingly, the radical party, Noith aud South, white and black, can asseiit to no reconstruction short of impartial sull'rage. Is Congress already committed to a less per fect plan ? Not at all. Congress is not com muted lor or against impartial suffrage. It has uot tied its hands against tbe future. It is free to act as the emergency may require. If, next winter, it shall choose to make impartial sut liage the conditiou of restoration, n cau do so, uuu Chi istiun souls will cry Amen! We know personally every prominent member ol Con gress, and we know that the leaders do not mean to admit the unadmitted States ou the nine adoption ot the amendment. Moreover, we know pertoua'.ly the leading radicals of the Republican party outs'de of Congress, and we know thut they"hae no intention of n.akiug the amendment the tiniil measure of admission. To say, therefore, as the National Committee say, tbat on couditirn ol adopting the amend ment, as Tennessee adopted it, "ihe door stands iavitingly open" lor the ten other States, is to make a piomisc to the ear to break it to the hope. There is a door, however, that does "stand invitingly open;" und whenever these States shall choose t cuter through it they will be received with shouts, thanksgivings, aud benedictions; it is the goldeu gate of impartial justice. Is it asked, Why then w as Tennessee admitted ou (be basis of the amendment? Iu the first place, Tennessee oii!?ht not to have been admit ted ou such a basis'; her admission was a m:n gled crime und tilunder. But the apology which Congress made for her admission was, that her attitude was exceptional that her case was not to be a piecciieut for the teu other States. Already the admission of Tennessee without impartial suffrage proves the peril of admitting any of the other States except on this only sate condition. Her Legislature is ab iut to remedy the deficiency 01 Congress, by enacting impartial sufirage at the uext session. The Tennessccdus who asked for tho admission of their State without impartial sullrage, said at Pbilndelphia that no remaining State 01 the ten could be safely udmitted except w ith this guar rauVe. We therefore repeat that Congress is not p'edgod, either by any existing oiler of terms to the unreconstructed State, or by the precedent of TPiinesfeo, to niuke the Constitutional amendment the basis of restoration. Even the New York 'J hues, of Monday, September 24, acknowledges this fuct. It says: "The adoption or rejection of the amendment has nothing whatever to do. as the law now ntnntlB, wuh the admission or rejection of mem bers from the Southern states. A bill providing for their admission on condition of its adoption was rejected ny tne iiotise, aua even 11 every Southern State should mtiiy the amendment to morrow. Coupes has uot pledged itself in nny way thereupon to udmit tueir representa tives in Congress." This is true. To sav. therefore, with the Syra cuse Republican Convention, or w ith the address of the National Repuhlicun toiiuniilee, that Conems will reslore the ten waiting. States if these State adopt ttie ametniiuent, is to misre present the issue. Admh able is the National Committee's logic, (cuipact and iron-botiud, to piove the power ot Congress over the question ol reconstruction We joyfully aaent to the argument. But, if Congress has an aosoluto right to dictate the basis of reconstruction, then what right has tbe National Committee to pledge and bind Con gress In advance ? Is Congtes?, alter rejeotinpf the dictation ot the President, to submit to the dictation of the National Committee? tilths name of tho 1 adical party, whose heart we know ' and who voice we spesk, we lepurtiate the Com- mntee's pledge to the iteDois as wholly unautno- '-. ina in, ana voia. uuon m the billowing passage irom vne com mittee's address: mit, ray gome, 'this section ot the penini nu'endrucnt to w.Kigned to coerce tue South into according suiVrttP to her blacks.' Not so, we repi j ; um omj n notify her ruling caste tnat ' r. ... tnh-- "f luem to Keep uu -n unvvs in serfdom. An arbtncfacy rarely surrenders its privileges, no mattp, uow oppressive, from abstract devotion to justice and right. It must have cogent, palpable reiwong tor so doing. 'Ve sav, thereloie, to South Caroilm;'it jon per sistently restrict all power to your ,100,000 whites, we must insiM that these no linger balance, in Congress and tbe choice of President, 700,009 Northern white freemen, but only 300,000. If you keep your blacks evermore in seridom, it must not be because we tempted you so to do, and rew arded you lor so doing."' Can anything bo more humiliating than to see the National Committee of the Republican party thus humbly kneeling at (he feet ot th Aans tocracy" ot tbe houth? Do we employ a Na tional Committee for the purpose of tinduiff arguments against "coercing" the South? Has the Republican party no higher duty to the negro than simply to "notify the ruling caste that we will no longer bribe them to keep their blacks hi serfdom?" Is the Republican party keeping its solemn pledge to its lour million allies by now saying to their former masters, 'If you keep your blacks evermore in serfdom, it must not be because we tempted you to doso"? If the negro were a white man, instead of a blnk, the National Committee would never have thought of thus degrading him bolow ihe level of a Khcl. Cocrchifl the South, forsooth! Did we uot rocrce the South into abrogating the ordinances ol secession? Did we not coerce the South into it pud ating the Rebel debt? Did we not coerce the South into ratity ng the prohibitory amend ment ? Without coeivwn, would the South have done these things' No. Neither, without caer fi'tJM, will the South enact Impartial sutl'rage. Look at it! Ibis committee tainks that, in order to uchicvo impartial sutlrage, we ought not to coerce, but brthe, tbe Siutu ! What will history say of the victorious war party of the North, it, alter executing a policy of coercion low artis secessiou, coercion towards the Rebel debt, coercion towards the prohibitory amend ment, it, attempted only a policy of bribery towards the negro? Which is of greater conse quence in God's sight, the repudiation ot the Rebel debt or the cntraiiclr.scineut of tbo ueero? Are millions of citizens of less conse quence than millions of dollars? Is money of more worth than man? Have the National Committee forgotten how our Lord ssil tbat two sparrows are sold i'or a larthmg; out that men aie of more value than mauy sparrows? If the only Issue of the tall campaign is to n, mi l nit Ai.irn. Iu.', . 7 , . , I n 1 . - e.ect such Republicans as will make ihe pending amendment the condition of restoration, why then is it neediul that ouly Republicans and not Dcnocrats should be chuseu? Multitudes of Democrats would gladly be elected to Congress on a pledge to mane the amendment, the ulti matum to the South. This is the New York Herald's ground. This is the ground ot all those Democrats who are secretly groaumg over President Johnsou and his speeches. The great duty of the full is to elect Republicans nay, to elect the most radical ot Republicans aud why? Because the nation ueed3, and means to have, a Congress staunch and immovable for equal rights The unanimous appeal of tho Southern. Loj alists at Philadelphia, representir.g tho whole ten unreconstructed States, speaks witttapathod that ought to melt all hearts: "We declare that there can be no security for us or our children there can oe no salety for tbo country against the fell spirit of slavery now organized fu the torm of serfdom unless the Government, by national ana appropriate legislation, enforced by national authority shall conier on every citizeu lu tho States we represent the Amoricati birthright of impartial suffrage und equality before the lav. This la the one all-sufficient remedy." Arc not thi'se words solemn, noble, and just Do not (hey far outshine the tarnished procla mation ot the National Committee? Let the Republican party ask itself ore tnoughtl'ul ques tion: Ought we to rcconsiruct the teu remain ing States so as to protect, or so as to destroy, the lives, property, and huppiness of their loyal people ? But if thcte ten States are to be recon structed iu the interest of loyalty, instead of treason, then let the unanimous demand of the Southern loyalists lake the place of the less worthy appeal of the National Committee. If, aller our pleasant fortune of a week's sojourn at Philadelphia with the noble representatives of the teu unreconstructed States, during which we learned their pin poses aud gauged their beans, we had come home only to strike hands with the policy of tho Na'ioual Committee a policy which the Southern loyalists came to the Norib to pipstd against as totally inadequate to their needs we should account ourselves little less than treacherous to the best tried and most au tiering friends of this republic. We say nothing in criticism of the good men who have signed the Nutional Couiuiitteo's ad dress. Some of these signers are enshrined in our inmost heart men whom we honor aud revere. How these lovers of justice cau assent to such a policy ot compromise is undouutedly explained ana excused to their own mm is, if not to ours. Horace Greeiev gave to this ad dress Ins revision and his Iiutne; but not his Leart. His heart is hungry for justice, and ciaves more than tho Committee's husk. Lieutenant-Governor Clatt in, of Massae!iusnts, signed it; but his hjnorea name is almost a syiiomyn lor et(ual rights. Senator Powlep. of leimestce, signed it; but yve well know that ins profound convictions are for impartial suffrage. It is with heaviness ot splut that wo hud so n any clear-sighted mcu holding buck half their thoughts iu a time when the ' country so urgently needs to hear every voice tliut cun speak lor impartial suffrage. Will the Republican party be injured by plain speech? No; it will be helped. But, whether helped or hindered, are we to give np to party whit wus meaut for mankind f "Duties are ours," said old Philip Henry, "the result Is God's." The duty of tbe Republican parly is to reject the pledge made by the National Committee. Tbe result may be satel.y left to tho Great Dis poser ot events, "who doeth all things well." Oh ! je of little faith ! Never were thirsty pil gtiuiw so willing to bo led lo a fountain of living waters, as the radical party of this nation are now willing to be led to tho safe ground ot im partial justice. Tlieieiore hear the voice of the Lord: "Speak to the children of Israel, tbat Ibey go forward.-' FERTILIZERS. M M O N JATEI) 1'1I0SP11ATE A CONCENTRATED FERTTUZEH. This preparation contains J'ure Ground none and the bent Fertilizing Halts knon to agifrultuial ohcmlatrr, combined Iu tucji a niauner aa to develop their produo live propenlea only when ucd on th aoll- Price 69 per tun. For sale at tb e oiauuiutturcrs' dcpoU, ho. li t VABKET Street, Plilladelptita, lio. 8 BUBLIMi SUP, How Vork. WILLIAM ELLIS & CO., Mauufactarora. OTtlOlO J3 A U G II ' S RAW DON E SUPER-PHCSPHATE OF LIME. Tbecrcat Fertilizer lor all croni. Quick in IU notion din: iKiiimutnt ui u tiluctt. Lxtabibtivd over twelve jihii,. ltlor supplied b the rarKO. direct froui tue wtiart oi i lie o ami'i.i'ti)ry, cu llljiral turiuu. UauulactuudonU by BAUOH a str.:.s, . OfTko Ho. i'JioutU DtLAWAliK i.-enu"i, BluiwSw l'ui'aJuijih.a.
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers