LETTER FROM H. O. WAGONER.

—

CHICAGO, April 4th, 1854.

FRIEND DOUGLASS: DEAR SIR:—I have just read in your paper of the 31st ult., an anonymous letter from Chicago, criticising the National Council, and also the State Council of Illinois.

As to the justness or injustness of the criticism on the National Council, I have nothing to say; because I believe every member of that body abundantly able to defend themselves against any unjust criticisms, emanate from whatever source they may.

But as I happened, by mere chance, to be a member of the State Council, I feel called upon to say something in regard to the matter about which the anonymous correspondent has written.

For some time previous, and subsequent to the assembling of the State Council of Illinois, on teh 2d of January last, I had been greatly depressed in mind and spirit, from cares and sorrows of a domestic character, caused by sickness, death, and the peculiar nature of my personal affairs, which almost wholly disqualified me from being of any service to the State Council, especially in the way of preparing any matter for its action; consequently, in this respect, I relied much upon other members of the Council, many of whom are prominent characters, and distinguished for their abilities and public spirit. I also anticipated a general attendance of the members, believing that "in multitude of council there would be wisdom." But in regard to the attendance of members, I was greatly disappointed; for only ten out of twenty assembled. One of our most reliable men, who resides in the southern section of the State, failed to meet with us, thus depriving us of his invaluable services on this important occasion. It would have been far better had we united upon an adjourned meeting of the Council, and not have proceeded to business at all with less than a majority present. But in consequence of several members having come from a distance, we did not feel like separating without making an effort to do something, so we organized by appointing A. H. Richardson, of Jo Daviess Co., President
pro tem., and Augustus Hill, of Will Co, Vice President pro tem.; R. H. Cain, of Jo Daviess, Secretary, and the writer Assistant Secretary.

To be brief, I would say, that little else was done, other than what has been stated by the anonymous correspondent already referred to. I will say, however, that we put together a sort of constitution, and appointed the following committees:—a committee on Agriculture, a committee on Mechanics, a committee on Education, and a committee on Statistics; and several resolutions were passed—a long debate on Woman's Rights, &c., &c. At the conclusion of our somewhat irregular proceedings, I was appointed to arrange the manuscript, as taken down by the Secretary, for publication. I did so, and handed the manuscript over to Mr. Isbell, who took it and did the best he could in the way of getting it printed. Through some mishap, the manuscript got mixed up and confused—part of it not
appearing properly in print, &c. My sister being very ill at this time, I was prevented from looking over the proof. Thus the whole thing turned out to be rather a bunglesome affair.

But this anonymous correspondent appears particularly affected at the treatment of the National Councilmen. It is to be regretted that they were not made honorary members, in accordance with what has been done in other States. I can only say this was one among the many defects of the proceedings of the Council. The National Councilmen were, however, permitted to make suggestions; and they did make suggestions, and spoke to their suggestions.

This correspondence goes on to "show the narrow and selfish policy which prevailed in our State Council—the collected wisdom of the State." Whether the policy was designedly selfish or not, it was, to say the least, illiberal. But I am unwilling to believe this alleged "selfish policy" was so intended by the gentlemen from whom it emanated, and through whom it "prevailed." I would rather think it an error of the head than of the heart.

The gentle fling in regard to "the collected wisdom of the State," would lead me to suspect that the writer was not a member of the National Council, for the National Council constitution requires that no member shall constitute "the collected wisdom" of the State; and as only ten members assembled on the 2d day of January last—three of them not until the evening of the last day of the session—consequently, we could not have had but half "the collected wisdom of the State"—"Egypt" at that. I say I believe a member of the National Council, one of "the collected wisdom" of the nation, would have been more liberal, than to have applied the term "collected wisdom" to we poor unfortunate Egyptians, without a just and lenial qualification of the term. Wisdom should rather pity than despise ignorance.

The remark that "all were not Solomons who sat in our Council," implies that some were Solomons. The question might arise, who and where were the Solomons, among the ten assembled, or among the ten who failed to assemble. "Ah! that is the question." But when I came to recollect, Solomon was a black man, and as were ALL black men, we must have been all Solomons. But enough of this; and to be more serious, I have made this hasty and imperfect statement to give some idea of the true state of the matter.

I trust, my dear brother, that our people,not only in Illinois, but throughout the entire country, will become more fraternal in our social relations—advise with one another calmly and dispassionately, and not suffer ourselves to be crippled in our efforts to improve, by being drawn off into internal dissentions, just at the time all our union and strength is needed while struggling into existence. I do hope, that Illinois will yet brighten up, and come fully up to her duty; and that the ball set in motion at the Rochester Convention will not cease rolling until it reaches the end aimed at[.]

Yours, for the Right of Man,

H. O. WAGONER.