Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

THE DAILY SUN. TmuuT Mouino Acotjrt 29. Office in Ike Sun Building, Wat tide <f Broad etreet, Second Door South tf Alabama. OO- Neu> Advertisements always found on first Page ; Local and Butina* Notion on Fourth rage. 9u Uwf«n. We publish in full, tlio docisioua of tho Supreme Court; also the daily “Pro ceeding*" of the Court, and keep the “Order of Banners” standing in our Tks New York World and The Atlanta Son. In our issue at to-day, we give oar randan two editorials of the New York Wrrld, making direct ottaoksapon the Political Editor of Tn Atlokta Son, to whieh wa iayite the doae attention of all, in eouneetiou with oar comments upon The first is the article at the 19th iuat, whieh we hare heretofore expressed our intention of replying to; and the other is taken tram the issue of the 21st Inst, of the same paper, which requires some notice from as We therefore prooeed now to submit to the Pablio what we hare to say in reference to both. In re sponding to the request of the World of the filh July, we had no disposition to enter into any personal controversy with Hr. Han ton Marble, its Chief Editor.— We had a higher and a much more im portant object The liberties of the country we believed, and still believe, to be in imminent danger. Our object to give ear aoansel, when solicited, (and with all the earnestness sad sincerity of our nature) as to the best and surest mode of providing lor their pissent rescue, ss well as their future preservation. We had no desire to bandy epithets with Hr. Harble or anybody else. In the great eivio contest now waging, we rely entirely upon the intelligence, virtue and patriotism of the people of the United States; hence, what wo said in re ply to the World"t inquiry was addressed to these highest attributes of human na ture. Ws believe the honest mosses have the intelligence to understand the truth when presented; end the virtue and pat riotism to maintain it ht the polls. This is our only hope for the rescue and per petuation of Publio Liberty on this Con floras with those views and objoctswe antcrod this controversy, and it is with theso solely we pursue it. If the arena of argument and of sound reason, addressed to “good sense,” he abandoned, as it has been by the World in this instance— if the ground be shifted—If personal con troversy now be resorted to for the pur pose of diverting public attention from the great vital questions involved, we shall not hesitate in the pnrouit of our adversary, nor shrink from meeting him on (hit field of contest, whenever it shall be necessary for tho vindication of truth and the rights and interests of the poo pie. We eon give blows os well as take them, on this line; and will do it when duty require* Ik We have no such sense of dignity either as a oitixen, or Editor, os that whioh Mr. Harble affectedly assumes to feel, when questions are put to him. In times of peril in politios, as in fire or tempest, he who stands on dignity has but small claim for the respeot of mankind, we have displayed in our controversy with the World any peculiar “crotchets,” or “idiosynoraoies” of a morbid intellect, or any offensive ''egotism,” its Chief Edi tor has been very careful not to let his readers witness the exhibition of these iufirmitiee, or form their own judgment on these charges against us, which ore made by the World, with so much "oour- tery” in the opinion of Mr. Marble. When he asked us through the oolumns of his paper, to be more precise in drawing the line between "tlead” and "living is sues,” and in stating the peinetpk on whioh the line of separation should be drawn, did we not respond in most cour teous language, stating with perfect clear ness, that the true line of separation, is that, whioh leaves all matters pertaining to the war against Secession- including its causes, oonduct and actual results, whether legitimate or otherwise—mi the tide of the dead past; and whioh leaves all matters relating to the new tear now waging against the Constitution, with its claisned results, on the tide if the living present f Did we not conclusively show, that every objeot tor whioh the war for the preservation of the Union was waged by the Federal authorities, was completely accomplished, when this new tear against the Pablio Liberties of the country was oommenoed by a majority faction in Con gress whose sole objeot is the overthrow of the entire system of free institutions in this oountry, and the erection in their stead of one centralised Empire ? Did we not show that every sot of this netc tear, With its claimed retells, rests upon nothing but bold and openly confessed usurpations f Did we not show that the 14th .pad Uth Ameodmonts—so-oulisd— to the Oenstitutioo, ate nothing but the claimed results of three usurpations, and in no sense, either legitimate or actual results ofthe the Union ? ,e‘ war for the preeervatiou of rious, in which liis Democratic renders, :ls well as dll the people of this country, huve ho deep an in ter ret then wc shall have some grounds to believe that he is inclined to honesty of purpose, and that he is not an enemy, in disguise, to the great cause of Truth, Justice, Itlght and Coiwtitutionid liberty—in tho mainten ance of which the Democracy of the Union are now enlisted. At present we cannot divest ourself of tho bcHtf that Mr. Marblo is doing infi nitely worse than barely tri/ling with Un people; that whilo under tho mask of De mocracy, he acts tho port of a harlequin for thoSbtertainmeut of the multitude suits his purpose, ae in the er consideration, he is in it at all, and hoe neither ieir cause nor affinity for iles; that if stripped of his i,” he would be found, even to be nothing lmt a grin p at exulting Radicalism, rsjedc- pOOpect of noon seeing the Despotism riveted upon the ■fa to see it dono by the handH of the Democracy Uiemselvcs ! His part in effecting the deetrnction of the Democracy, by their own hand, may not be nulike that of the perfidious Bioon in bringing about the overthrow of Troy by operating upon the over-croduli- ty of tho Trojans themselves. This, we say to the honest masses of the Democracy eveiywhere, is oar pres ent belief, is to his position; and, as one among many other reasons which force this heliif upon oar mind, we cite his last editorial referred to, in whieh he attempts to act the buffoon, by bringing into de rision matters of the gravest import, which can engage a true nun's attention on pablio affairs. The usurpations, by whioh the “fraud ulant amendments” ore claimed to have been carried, are such os should excite the indignation of eveiy patriot in the land, whether there is any effectual remedy against them or not; and tho greater indignation, in proportion to the degree of imjirobabilily of redross against their mischievous effects. When we had shown conclusively, by irrefutable argu ments, that the validity of these amend ments was a judicial, as well as a political question, and might bo brought before the courts, and there tested in one clearly legitimate mode of redress— to say nothing of others—and offered this as an unanswerable reason, among others, why they should not receive a formal sanction ;of tho Democracy before their validity was, at least, thus tested ; this, tho liorloquin of tho Worhl springs forth and jestingly cries out: Mr. Stejihms is a veritable Don Quixote, mounted upon “a sjHlvtnetl, tcaUayal, draggle-biiletl, sk covered skeleton" Rusinante, aiming at tlte impracticable, visionary and ridiculous. Ridiculous, is it, to appeal to courts for a redress of wrongs ? But, says harlequin, strutting in his ludicrous “ Spots” with his thumb upon his nose and little finger projecting with a significant motion : It is ridiculous be cause no case can lie brought before the Courts. Tho idea of getting this ques tion lieforo tho Courts is us absurd as it would bo to proposo to sow up all the pine timber in New England and Cunadu, by a wind-mill to bo creeted on tho top of Mount Washington ! How are yon going to get tho logs up there ? There con be no decision by tho Courts without parties—and who is to be plaintiff and defendant in such a case ? This is the grinuiug imp's wily trick to amuse and delude the people 1 If he had really desired to know how a case under these amendments can bo brought before tho Courts, (and not how- logs could be hauled to his Quixotic 'wintl-miU" on tho top(of Mount Wash ington)—as well ns who can lie plaintiff, and who dofendaut, in siu-h n case, he might have got tho information from the pleadings iu just such souse in tin's State, whieh were m-nt to him, and which he refused to publish for the information of others, whether lie rend them himself or not. His reason for refusing to publish, ire believe, was the unanswerable argu ment therein contained against the volub ly of those stiqiendous frauds. That he read tho whole we have but little doubt however, and just os little tliat this ques tion so propounded by him now is but. n mocking pretense The actual ease referred to, it is true, was uot sustained by the usurpers who instituted tho prosecution; but harlequin' question is fully answered by saying that other coses involving tho validity of those Amendments, may be brought lieforo the Court* under the Enforcement Acts of Congress, iu the siuno way in which this one was. We are not surpriaod that tho steed upon whioh we are ^mounted, should '»cvm la him” to bo “u spavined, tenth eyerl, dragyle-taileil, skin-covered skeleton' of a boast, for it is none other than the Coxohtutio!* of the United States. He, and those with whom ha lias acted the part of hialifo, have ever enter tained, and tone of them openly declared, very similar opinions to those now so sinisterly expressed by him of tho funda mental law of tho Union But, mys harlequin, with another mocking grin, a minority of the Siqtreme Court are thoroughly Bat heal, and trill de cide its furor tf the validity if the amend ments, /bauds or no /bauds. How does harlequin know this? Has not a majority of that Court, Radioal as thay ora, decided every question whioh has gone up before them, ss yet upon the Constitutionality of the Reconstruc tion measures, (upon whioh alone these amendments rest)—against the validity of those acts ? If the foundation be Inval id, can the superstructure stand? Bnt their birth right, liv those who approach Di mocraiic principles, uid to utiiiaAt DM the World venture to assail this troveri^’correctnoas of tho principle upou'wlilch it was drawn f Did it ven- tuse to question a position assumed by us in any part of that response ? Has it ever furnished its readers with our reply to its inquiries ? Were they not, as hon est Democrat*, searching for truth when ever it lay, entitled to it ? If we are so suppose the Supremo Court, constituted wanting in “good sense" In that reply a* „ it, should decide in favor of them to Mgfeest and urgo a policy which would be so AeatnuOivs to ih* Democratic par ty, srhy did ha not show whsrsin the ar gument was answered, either ill foot or logic ?. When Mr. Mhrble sJudl do this or even attempt to do it—or when he ahall allow in his them qmsn- 1 it this soy reason why the people should sanction or approve them, even ,fter such a decision ? Is not all political powar in the people aiill ? Con they not change their Rulers at the polla, and change tho present constituency of that Court; unless they suffer themselves to be treated, in Oils instance, ont of them with the hands of Esau, but with tho voioc of Jucob V—those w ho coiue tinder the garb of Democracy but with tho identity of Radicals ! Did nut tho Courts of England give their sanction to the validity of tho lc-vy of ship money by virtue of the Royal Prerogative ? Did Hampden, Pym, Coke and other cham pions of Popular Rights, give up tho question because of such un iniquitous decision ? Did they not agitate at tho polls until tho rights of tho people pre vailed over the power of tho throne ? Did not the Courts iu this country de cide the infamous Alien and Bedition Acts of 1798 to be Constitutions! and valid? Was not a decided majority in both Houses of Congreaa supporters and defenders of them ? Was not the Executive in favor of them ? Did not every Btate in the UnioD sustain their validity, exoept Virginia and Kentucky ? Nay, more, out of the tiro hundred newspapers then published in the United States, did not one hundred and seventy-eight throw all their weight and power in favor of their expediency as well as va lidity ? Was the Democracy of that day rallied upon a “Don_ Quixote adventure’ for tho rescue of their libertiee, even against all these oddB? It is true the "Botiiuilne," upon which they were mounted, was the Constitution—tho same winning steed upon which we would have them take stirrup now, however “spavin ed, vnll-eyal atul tlraggle- tailed" this much- abusod creature may have seemed then, or may seem now, to Centralists, Imperial ists and Monarchists. It was upon this “hobby horse" or “Ito- sinante,” (if harlequin so pleases to style it) of the Constitution, that Mr. Jefferson was mounted, in 1800, when he carried the people of the country at the polls, against the decision of the courts—against the influence of the msjortics in Con gress—and against the patronage and Power of tho President; booked then, by the Sedition Aot, as the President now is by the present Ku-Klux Act, which is bnt a metempsychosis of its original prototype, He went to tho country upon tho bold issuo that those dangerous usurjuitions of Congress were “not valid lairs," but were "nullities.” The honest, liberty loving masses of tho people everywhere sustained him in this position. The great civic victory aebioved was one of the grandest and most important iu the aunals of His tory. Gross usurpations with their results were brought to an end. No more pros- ooutions for violations of "nullities” were instituted, and all the victims of tyranny thon in jail, were rcleasod by tho new Ex ecutive. Tho ultimate political power in this oountry for tho rectification of all wrongs growing out of abuses of publio trusts, or misjudgmonts in official position, is in the people. Upon the “ Rosinante' of this principle every friend of free insti tutions tho world over, ought to he mount ed, however “spaviuod and draggletailed 1 it may scorn to bo to the jaundiced oyes of tho enemies of popular rights, whether they be secret or open iu their hostility. The reason that this principle seems to Mr. Marble to be so “irall-eyeir and other wise ridiculous, is easily accounted for. It is owing to his Radical training. “Antecedents” he speaks of 1— “Mr. Stephens' antecedents!” Better would it have been for him had he been silent on the subject of "antecedents" in this connection. Whatever may have been our political ''antecedents,” none can be named for which we feel ashamed, or in any degree “mortifiod” in thinking of. Whether tho Chief Editor of tho World can, with an easy conscience, suy as much for him self, upon a review of his own, we will leave for his serious reflection. As to our Democracy, it is exhibited in tho Publio Records, extending through a period of over thirty ycara—and it is a matter of pride to ns, that during that whole time we never gave a vote incon sistent with tho principles of Thomas Jefferson, which constituted the Plat form of the Democratic Party in 1800, and from which the party has never “de parted,” and under which tho country was more prosperous for sixty years than any other since on tho earth. If Mr. Marble has ever, up to this time, given a single vote in support of theso prin oiples, the proof of tho fact lias yet to be addneod. His present relation to tho party, and the only one he ever bore towards it, as we understand, and believe the fact to be, was bought with a price. The World newspaper, which ho now ooutrols, as wo understand, and believe tho fact to be, was established as a Radi cal sheet, and while it was under his con trol ns such, ho was under the necessity of selling it for waut of means to carry it on. - This event ip his “antecedents” is too important to bo omitted. His language on the occasion, to one of his Radical patrons, ns reported, is in theso words: ■ r n * mortifying li«* ]rt»8Kil.-ility of our lx jig ituLxulit> J d by -in* liariicol Dynasty at Wa^iingUm ! No fuct ia more notorious than tliat of iia alnui'lomnent of the Democratic tick •t iii the i;u*t PreHulentiul election, wheth er for mono,)’, ua some think, or for wliat- j\er other motive, all mast deride for themselves. Our own belief ".lieu "»m, and now i«, that it wna because of tho Jeffersonian principles unuounccd in the platform. His innate Radicals ra caiued him to revolt at the idea of seeing these cfetablialied by tlio election of Hoj mour and Blair, the prospect of which woh ho promising up to the time of his open de fection. With what grace, then, can a man with these “antecedents”say that the cause of the Democratic Party will bo “ handi capped” by our advocacy ? Is it not much more likely to bo “hand-cuffed” if his advice be followed ? How can he as sert with any show of plausibility tliat our advocacy of “ Btato Rights” can have any “affinity to secession” as a practical question ? Have we not again and again said tliat all matters and questions rela ting to the late war—including its causes, conduct and actual results should bo classed among the “dead issuen” ? Have wc not said, in express words : ** A legitimate result of the wet. we believe, the settlement,—*fid settlement forever In this oountry. of the policy of accession as "I inuxt hive more money to keen my paper going •or 1 ahull be compelled to cell ont to the Demo- "orats, which will be tho moat mortifying event of •my life." In this way, as wo understand it, Mr. Morlilo became npnnoctod, n few years ago, with Bomo of tho leading wen of tho Democratic Party, in tho city of Now York. We believe the account thus given of the origin and nature of his oonucction with the Tarty to this extout, is true, from the/ort, among other considerations, that this statement relating to his "ante cedents” was published in tho New York Day Bock, at his door, ou the 12th of this month—(the date of the first of his arti cles against ns in our columns to-day)— and has uot been denied or controverted by liim since. One reason of tho delay of our uotice of his attack upon ns, of tho 12th instant, was a desire, before re plying, to see if he had anything to say against the correctness of the statement, or whether, by his silence, we should be justified in behoving it to be Irns—and treating it accordingly, as ire have, in our reply. This is the man, then, who has the un blushing faoe to question our fidelity to W’*is oi redrew •sOiii't sny ularvatlon. ysrl of Uie federal GoT.rnment.’" Did not the World, in its article of tho the 8th of July, soy that - These admirable riusing paragraph! hit the mark "lo the bull's aye." Did ho uot commend them especially because they were given over our initials, which, since, hove given him so much uneasy concern! This full endorsement of our viows and teachings in regard to Secession was in the same article in which we were invitod to state with more precision the principle on which the line should Ik: drawn be tween “ dead” and “living issues." It, at least, forever estops his raising this ob jection to our advocacy of tho rights of the States, or people, as involved in the coming contest, unless we should change or modify our position on it;—and he has no reason to sutqiect even that we ever shall do any such thing; for if, when tho Southern States were their full power* and glory, led by Mr. Toombs and Mr. Davis, (whom he would represent os our favorite leaders) we opposed, with all our might, the policy of secession, against their advice and utmost exertions—eggeil on too, os they were, by many of Mr. Marble’s then Rad ical associates, who said, "lot tho Union slide," and “if the Cotton States desire to withdraw, let thorn depart in pence"— if, we say, under such circumstances we opposed tho policy of secession, what sano man can suppose that any teachings of ours would look to any resort of that character in this day of Southern weak ness, exhaustion and prostration? For tho special information of Mr. Marble, we here say that we are governed now quite os littlo by the views or objects of Mr. Toombs or Mr. Davis, in refer ence to Platforms or Candidates, whatev er they may be, as we were in reference to Secession; but one thing may be count ed npon as oertain, and that is, if these reckless usurpations which have marked the progress of tha Radical Party in their war against the Constitution, since the war against Secession was terminated with its actual results, and the accomplishment of all of the avowed objeot* for which it was waged, shall, in an evil and fatal hour, be indorsed and sanctioned by the voting masses of the Democracy of the Uuited States, and the Federal Union be- oomo merged into a Centralized Empire, then what ever may be said of the dis cretion or wisdom of Mr. Toombs and Mr. Davis, or others with them, on the policy of Secession in 1861, their impul ses will be held to have been right by the impartial judgment of mankind for all time to come. The Chief Editor of the H*xr/d has the hardihood to assert that we have intima ted that if the Oeneral Convention of the Democratic Party does not adopt cur riews that wo will not support its platform or candidates. This assertion is made in the face of onr positive declaration re peatedly made, that though our views, as to tho proper lino of policy to bo pursued in the canvass, should be overruled, yet wo would support any candidate upon imy platform which shall not violate the fundamental principles of the Demo- ocratic organization; nor embody an eiulorsemcnt or approval of any of the iniquitous usurpations of the party in Power. We have uo fviews but to adhere to Democratic priuoiplea, so far as Platform is concerned. We have said and repeat, that we are willing to jgo into the can vass on the principles and advice sot forth iu the lato Democratic Congressional Ad dress, to which he with seeming approval calls our attention. We respectfully ask the Editor of the World, though he may think our question a "trifle impertinent," if he is willing to do the same ? We are not only candid, but thorough ly in earnest jp stating our belief to be that he is not. We do not believe that he intends to support any candidate, upon any Platform whioh does not ra- dorse and sanction, ss valid, the most in famous sots of '‘usurpation, fraud ^gd perfidy,” whieh have marked the history of the ruling Dynasty at Washington for the last fire years. It was our belief of this purpose on his part, whioh prompted us to put the direct questions we did to him on that point. If our bo ng' was not well founded, why did he not answer the questions ? Is there any thing “impertinent" or “irrelevant' about them ? Was it not quite ss much “a trifle im pertinent' in him to put questions to ns, ss it was for us to put questions to him ? Did he not, on taking np onr questions, say he was “quite willing to answer ?” Why, then, after leading them—like a choking witness on the stand—did hs re fuse to do what bn at first raid he was wil ling to da ? Why did he then, all at oaae, threw himself upon his effected dig nity and attempt to get off by saying the qiustions were “a trifle i.iqn-rtinmt?"— Nay, more, that they amounted to noth ing blit asking if he would "support Alexander II. Stephens ii he should bo nominated Wa* subterfuge ever more dearly evasive or pitiul-ic ? Why wa* this subterfuge resorted to iu this extremity ? Was it uot as u drown ing man catches at a straw ? Was it not from an unwillingness to make that dis closure which an answer would necessari ly have brought forth ? It was in this dilemma harlequin became mum. It was in this perplexing strait "Spots" threw himself upon his dignity, lb: would uot answer questions because they were trifle impertinent! " Who ever heard of "Spots," with his grimaces, ever being caught in such a predicament before ? The solution of the extraordinary phenomenon is easy. Questions, whieh are quite harmless and inoffensive to tho innocent and upright, are often fearful instruments of torture to the double-dealing and dishone it They are terrible probes to a guilty conscience—like the Spear of Ithuriel with its “celestial temper” whieh “no falsehood can endure the touch of;" they often make disguised men—passing for what they are not—show instantly their real obaracter, whether they “will or no,” whether they answer or not So much for the merits of our coutro versy with the Chief Editor of the New York lrorkf in view of its personal a* well as public character—up to thisstage of it* progress. If Mr. Marble is not a disguised ene my in the Democratic camp, let him fur nish somo bettor evidence of his fidelity to their Cause and Candidates than is to be found in bis “antecedents. If his real object is not under the name of Democracy to Radicalize tho country, lot him answer our questions and satis factorily explain why ho did not answer at first. The dignity and a "trifle imper tinent" subterfuge will not do. A. H. H. Prom tho Now York World. Alexander II. Stephens as i Democrat. Those of our readors who happen to take sulhciont in- terofct in tho lato Vice-President of the Southern (Jon* toderacy to have read our articles relating to him, will remember that wo have treated him, througlioi with marked courtesy and consideration. We, course, Intended this as a recognition of his talents, uot a tribute to his antecedents; for his antecedents asa high offioer of tho Confederacy would,, under any circumstances, have obstructed the pie and the Stabs, be :U*H* IU i It id par'd uj Lie LuHJiMUir.n in aat Adjudication of tbo point iu eutrovervy ? Atiit, at least, until it bo seen whether tho • ,t will not take jurisdiction «.f iLc ipicnt.o W« a hail rocur to this subject ugaiu bef- '.. anas imimnaum | fHi9fclluuco ti2 tXbrrtlisrmcme. Siff&JSgiflil CITY FLOURING MILLS, a close affinity to sccasaiou, and a sound doctrine is too heavily haudicappad for a winning race, we have always respected his great ability, dially welcomed him as a oo-la borer In the field of Democratic journalism. It never i that he could bo so wanting in good t judgment as to advocate tbs adoption, by the Demo cratic party, of the very policy which its deadl'est foes wish It to adopt, in order to secure them an easy victory. We hope we shall never so far forget selves as to fail in proper civility to tho lato Vice- l’residcut of the unfortunate Confederacy; but must discharge our higher duty to the Democratic party. We will not for a moment believe that The Atlanta Sun is subsidized by Oeucral (> rant’s sup porters; but rather than havo the paper under its present management stop, they could well afford it liberal subsidies from their electioneering funds. Mr. Stephens asks us some questions which we are quite willing to answer "The World, however, is gracious enough to admit that we aro Democrat enough to bo counted the support of the Democratic nomiuees of the gen eral convention of tho party. How this will turn out, if wc arc »n life, time and events will determine. We shall never support by counsel or vote either any one of the actual perpetrators of the great frauds attempted to be Imposed upon tbo people of this country iu tho matter of tho so<aUed amendments to the Constitution, or any ono of the "accessories after the fact" to these most monstrous outrages. "But just here we wish to put two plain questic to the chief editor of tho World, to which wo a many real, true Democrats of tho old liuo wish equally explicit answer: "1. Will he support or voto for any mou for Presi dent in 1873 who shall hold that the fourteenth aud fifteenth amendments—so-called—have been right fully incorporated in the organic law aud adopted •in the manner and by the authority constitutionally ap pointed r if th* ion ah _ no "new departure,” but condemn these fraudulent amendments as the results of gross usurpations and abuses of power, and go to the conntry upon this, with other great living issues, betwoeq constitutional ism and coutralisnj, will he support the nomiuees ?•' Mr, Stephens makos a plain enough Intimation thai if the Dtmocratic National Convention does adout his views, he will not support its platfori candidates. We ask all Southern and all Northern Democrats to take note of this avowal, and rate Mr. •Stephens’ fidelity to the party accordingly, lie says, in substance, that ho would prefer the re-eloction oi General Grant to the election of General McClellan, or anj Democrat who holds General McClellan's views. Perhaps he thinks thst Mr. JeffersoD Davis, or Mr. llobert Toombs, would be an eligible candi date to bring into the field against Orant. At he wishes to fight the battle on thoir platform, he ought, .. • -• *-• .-a—• i voca t e nomina- i representatives of nee who eminen ‘ represents Mr. Stephens’ views, there would be contest. Tho ltcpublicans would walk over i course. Nothing could please the friends of Graut better than to run nlm against Jefferson Davis, or llobert Toombs, or some candidate who is conspicu ously identified with the viows which they hold in commou with Mr. Stephens. Mr. Stephens asks "the chief editor of the World" to auswef certain questions which seem to us a tnlle impcrtlneut. It is uot the habit of the editor of tho World to sign all his articles, as Mr. Stophens does, with his own initials. Tho H'orfd would havo to deacend very far below its own conception of the dignity of its position to make itself the organ of the personal idiosyncrasies, or a trumpet to sound forth the personal impir- , of any one man. The World claims to organ df Deiuoor&tip public opinion. It has a wide intorcourso with Northern Democratic states men, aud aims to express the average senao of the wisoetaud most sagacious members of tho party.— Its chief claim to consideration (apart from its mer its as a newspaper) rests npon its representative char acter. Its editor never signs ita editorials, ss Mr. Stephens always ddes, because he trusts that he has too much acute and modesty, aud beonuso he is too truly and sincerely a Democrat, to think the opinions of any one oitif on and voter of much publio couse- quence. Intelligent people lQok into newspapers ( learn the drift and tendency of public oniniou; an the value and efficiency of an editor depoud moi upon his political connections and representative character than upon the peculiarities of his individ ual viows. The public cares nothing for what s monk may thiuk in hi* cell; aud it values at about tho hsiuo * 5 what an egotist may choose to pot forth with his a signature. Thoughtful mun read newspapers to find what other people think, not to learn tbs morbid anatomy of some crotchety mind, which, not content to rest ita claims to attention on the value of its tacts aud the force of its logic, thrusts forward its personality as if thst wore of any real weight. How Mr. Htsphens or how "the ohief editor of the World" may vote in 1873, is of very alight conse- quenee. Each of them la but one of several millions of Democratic voters. Nothing can be more petty In a if we would support ... gentleman should be nominated as the Democratic candidate in 1873. Our reply is, that such a nomina tion is Inconceivable; and it is equally Inconceivable that any candidate should be nominated who repre sents his views Either would be a Democratic sur render without a fight. We beg Mr. Stephens to mark that every Democratic Journal of influence, standing or circulation, in the whole North, repudiates las views. Wo beg him to remember thst the address of the Democratic Senators and Bepreeentativee in Con gress, and all the recent Democratic State platforms, are pitched In the same key, There lea vast, an overwhelming, l.r. pondcranoe of Democratic sent’- meat in favor of dropping dead isaueu. And yet Mr. Stephen* who cannot bo ignorant of these facts, virtually proclaims that he will lead a bolt from the Democratic party unless ita majority surrenders to Atm, and each coadjutors of his as Messrs. Davis and Toombs t Whether be is a fkithful Democrat is question which we are quite willing to leave to th judgment of the party.—New York World, August 19, Mr. Stephens Isa vent.iL A msk ; thie '>bstrr»i:ou i r it has long been the urn public of letters thst Don •njoyablc characters r Don Quixote. We do • hostility or contempt. | liiuoua vcIce of the n- I ixotu in one of the n *irL.#*ITal, GEORGIA. „„ lau,;b at hw* tie ... .Irth, tor be carries into all bin ridlcuh adventures a loyal, loving heart, the loftiest scutp aieuts of chivalry, uud a philogbphy elevated fiction.— If nil tlnmr* arc equal* why uot |)utro i/c- hums inanufat-tare J refined. How cnv'able is that Illusive predominance jf the imagination which colors the most ol> ’ jects with the resplendent hues of poetry I To be •, a Ltirber’s tin ba-da lias but a f.uut resi inbiunce knight’s glittiHiug helmet; but how supremely i is tho man whose traubiigiiritiu fancy converts the barber’s Laxiu into a helmet; a flock of sheep in- magnificent army; windmills into tower- wondering, reverent Usucho Bants, tho unimaginative squire. ralness . , _ . attend on our knight with great fidelity bnt many questionings. The Bos iuaute which Mr. Btephens is riding foemi to os merely the spavined, wall eyed, drsgglt-talled. skin- coverod skeleton that would appear in a photograph iirelieved by an artist's flattering touches. Mr. Stephens has lately been maintaining that the validity of the fourteenth and fiiteenth amendments is s proper judicial question, which may be finally decided by the Federal Supreme Court. Wo deem it unnecessary to argue the question of Ju risdiction with Mr. Stephens, who has lately been discussing that point with i *uch acuteness and inge nuity. If Mr. atepheus should advocate the con struction of a windmill on the top of Mount Wash ington for sawing pine logs into lumber, wo, in do- timing to take any stock in the enterprise, would not argue the feasibility of constructing the mill. We should think it quite irrelevant for Mr. btephens to contend thst the force of wind on thst elevated peak would suffice for sawing all the timber in New Eng land and the Canadas. Admit it all; but how are you going to get your logs to the top of Mount Washing ton ? Suppose il true, as Mr. Btephens argues, that it is within the competency of the Hupreme Court to decide whether an amendment to the Constitution has, or has not,been properly adopted,how is he going to get the case before the court? Mr. Htephens was bred a lawyer, aud ought to be able to tell us. There can be no suit without parties—a plaintiff and a defend ant. Who shall be plaintiff, aud who defendant, in a suit to test, for exomple, the validity of the fifteenth amendment? Mr. Htephens seems more interest ed than anybody; but can Ae bring a suit? Clearly not, for several sufficient reasons. In tho first place, be has no cause of personal complaint of which i Federal Court could lake knowledge. In the next place, if negro voting in Georgia were on individual wrong to him, there is uo party on whom he could serve notice as defendant. He cannot sue Congress; ho cannot sue tho States that ratified the amendment; be cannot sue hit own BUte of Georgia nor any of its officers. No suit cau be brought by anybody, nor will lie against anybody, for testing the \alidity of tbe fifteenth amendment. If In anyutate, the right of suffrage were denied to negroes, a nogro of that btato might bring a suit for damages; but every btate admits negroes to the suffrage ou the same terms as whites. There is, therefore, no ground of prosecu tion on either side, nor against anybody. We wish Mr. btephens would tell us how a suit can be coua< mcnced that would bring the validity cf tho fifteenth amendment before the bupreme Court for adjudica tion ; tell us how he will find parties that would have a standing iu court, aud what is the wrong for which the plaintiff would seek redress. If au iugeuious lawyer cannot explain how such a suit can be brought his idea of testing tho validity of the fifteenth amendment in the Supreme Court is of course chimerical. It is a windmill for sawing logs ou the summit of Mouut Washington whither no logs will be brought. Aside from the impossibility of finding a plaintiff aud defendant In Buch a suit as Mr. Stephens c templates, ho ignores the fatal obstacle to the s cess of such a suit (if one could be brought) that iu the itcrsonnel of tho bupreme Court. It has amendments invalid, if a case 0 . ere before them. It is mere chicanery aud trifling for Mr. Stephens to aay thst Democrats ought to wait, boforo acquiescing in the amendments, and see whether the Supremo Court will uot declare them void. The opinions of the Supreme Court judges on that subject are no secret. The views of the Chief Justice are as well known as those of Mr. btephens, and there is no cvidcnco and probability that any member of that bench dina- statoiunanlike, because it shirks the main facts of the situation with which Mr. Stephens professes to deal. —Hew York World, 31«t Aug., 1871. Popular familn Sewing machines grinding now wli.-at, and am prepared to and will guarantee evary pound of flour that I sell to ooum lully up to rej-rcHeutatluu; otherwise, it cau be ship ped back to me at my ex]>euau. 1 aui prepared to furnish the trade, iu any quantity, iu aackti, half sacks or quarter sacks: PKIDE OF DIXIE, from choice white wheat. CITY M1LL8 FAMILY, from selected red wheat. CAPITOL MILLS FAMILY. HTAU MILLS FAMILY. BKAN, sacked or unsacked. <J. E. BUTLER, Proprietor. augll 3m __ _ To Parties Dealing to Build rpHE undersigned would respectfully lufisrus tbs X citizens of Atlanta that hs Is now prepared to ttuportutend tho Bwtldhsr must Mukhlmf, or tho F<sfi/i/sc Ihpsnrlmemt swift, of ssssos tHrol Clam Hamo I hop mmp wish Is UroeU Qo haa at his command a picked set of hands. s»»d feels confident In giving general satisfaction. JOiiJfT C. nYtCHOJLSL OFFICE IN AIU-UNE HOU8*. FBYOB BTRE1T ap27-r.ni HAML’L II. 8TOUT, M. JL>., Agent for Introduction of Harper fit Brothers’ EDUCATIONAL* WORKS. Office at Phillips It Crews’, corner Marietta and Peachtree streets, Atlanta, Ga. Judge T. H. Fob- ter, clerk; always prescut to attend to busiuehs iu his absence. aug 1-lni WANTED. Address BEAL K8TATB, Bun Office. A Hants. Ga , Aug. 33. 1871-41 HW. JltiCKIE, Painter andiUeco-ator, O FFICE above W. G. Jack’s, Whitehall street, r turns thanks to his old patrons for formei fsvors, and hopes by attention to basin ass to merits continuance of the same. ap3G-ly Til OS. HAMPTON, K. D. SALMONS, V. A. NABBOUB, Drake'* 'Creek Mill*, F. A. BARBOUR 0 CO., IK "flour, MEAL, V SHIP STUFF, I'XJJVnx.ur, MMJVTLCM r. HIGHEST PUICI PAID FOIL WHEAT. TI produce delivered at the depot frae of charge* aprlS-dm ST, Musical Instruction. pBOF. HUTCUJSSON. Musical Director of tho Docthovcn Society, Atlanta, Teacher of Piaua-Furto, Organ aud Melodeon. Address—Caro Lawahe aud HayncR, Whitehall street, or P. O. Box 2G1. aug34.1u JOHN MILLEDGE, Jr., ATTORNEY AT LAW. Office in Grant'* Building, corner of Marietta I AM GLAD HE HAS COMB. I CAN now cane your chairs, and make them look new for the same you will pay for a bottom. No charge for varnishing chairs when I oane them, sud I warrant all UphaMorlnge, #ferafl«r* JfejwtfrlMf, «•«., to give satisfaction. Furniture covers cut, made and a fit warranted. Hair and spring mattresses made to sehold f School Notice. Streets, will commence c MONDAY, 23TH OF AUGUST, and close of the Iflih of Dooember. Curriculum of studios same as odoptod iq bast Schools and Colleges. TERMS; PRIMARY CLAM-13 00, INTERMEDIATE—(Embracing all English branch- oa)-|3 00. CLASSICAL—(Including, with higher English, Latin aud Freuchj—$4 00, per scholastic month. SHARP & FLOYD, 8UCCE8S0R8 TO GEO. SHARP, Jr. Whitehall SI., Jtllanta, Ga. MA.XEFACTIJR1SU AND MERCHANT JEWELRY. DEALERS in Watches, Diamonds and Jewelry. FAIRS. M* GOLD, 8ILVKR and l?ro4|i the Nejp lork World. “li it a Judicial Question PI [From tbe Atlanta Bun,] In oar artfaile under this heading tbe other day we were interrupted in the midat of a sentence, but said we had a great deal more to eey upon the subject.— We have uot time now to resume the topic, further tf t\g rah'rfifv of Iho frawtniml universally admitted to be fireedulent—u a judicial one, as we clesrly showed It to be. or even if it be e debatable questum whether the courts can ughtful y sad properly inquire into Ike matter, why ahould tons and utterly destructive of the r To nlgricHltural Fair Commit- tees. full line of PREMIUMS Of all kinds. Wo guarantee PERFECT SATISFAC TION, and will give the DEST TERMS. We do not desire to make any profit off of County Fairs Just starting, and will take pleasure in filling large or Atlanta Marble Works. WILLIAM GRAY IMPORTER AND DEALER IN American, Italian and all other Marbles SCOTCH GMUtJTITE. llfi 0NUMENT8, Statues, Vases, Tombs, ami *11 ItJL other styles of Marblo Work dono on short no ne and in the latest and im Designs of all Ccmetory i Address application. aug35 9m J. E. LEAS, Auknt. r write for price|. SHARP *l FLOYD, ATLANTA, 0A.| HOME-MADE Carriages, Buggies, PHAETONS, 1*0., cfco., cfcc., cfco. AT ■A.. T. Finney’s Carriage Emporium, i\0. 5 KKOAD STREET, •0 GEORGIA. The I’lonoor Carriage Manufactory of Atlanta. JJIS-m-k AyiJALS If not SURI-AH-iES, In Bnl.li, Best A’orthem,Ataste Work. And lu durnbllltr I, FAX aDFEHIOK—.11 work be- lug put up of tho very beet seeeoned wood end by THE BEST WORKMEN, While in PRICER, I sen oompete with ANY MANUFACTORY IN THE UNITED 8TATEH- tM~ Call and examine for yourself, or send your orders {jarbnmrc, QTntUrp, (Sant, W. Iu. WADSWORTH Ac CO., IMPORTERS AND WHOLBALE DEALERS IR HARDWARE, CUTLERY, Gim OArriAse M/itior* and 'BiiHriw AfXnrl wl mad Tool*, Rubber runt T ipnthoi- Bnlrins- No. *4 Whitehall Stmt, Oor. AUbrmt. Oi-porlt, juim' Dank ATLANTA CA> .W^te—anitewtio SUBSCRIBE FOB THE SUN’ TUB OVA' Stoat* in pm- oomr.