F. G. HIBBARD VS SOUTHERN CORRESONDENCE.

ROCHESTER, AUGUST 3d, 1856.

MR. EDITOR:—I am aware that in order fully to appreciate the condition of a bondman, one must wear the chains, feel the last, &c. It is equally true that in order to know what proscription means, one must be proscribed. The former it has been my fortune never to have experienced, although its most degrading features I have witnessed in all the chief slave cities in the Union; but the latter I am now passing through.

Yes, sir, I am, with others, a proscribed man; the great SOUTHERN GODDESS has placed her iron heel on me, in the shape of an Editor.

I have traveled as you are aware, during the last four years past, through nearly all the slaveholding States of the Union, remaining South nearly three years. While there my position enabled me to make observations, whereby I acquired a knowledge of the SOUTH and its INSTITUTIONS that few, or no Northern tourist has seldom or ever reported. For nearly two years, I reported my Southern observations through the columns of the , under the caption of "Southern Correspondence," and over the signature of "Argus." The numbers came out weekly and semi-weekly until about the first of May last, when our General Conference commenced its session; then the regular correspondents—European, Eastern, Western, and Southern—were all suspended for the time being, to give place for General Conference matter.

In the meantime, by what we call a great Southern , Mr. Hosmer, our old lion-hearted Editor, was displaced by Mr. Hibbard, the present Editor, by whom three of my articles, which Mr. H. found in the office on his coming into power, were rejected; for the following reasons, found in his last paper:

"We stated (says he) last week, that we never had refused to publish Anti-Slavery because it was Anti-Slavery. As allegations to the contrary have been published to our prejudice, we now give full statement of the facts from which the report has originated. It was on our first or second visit to this office that the publisher banded us two communications from 'Argus.' We rend portions of both sufficient to fully satisfy ourself of the impropriety of publishing. The articles contained detailed accounts of the immorality concubinage, had licentiousness of New Orleans.

"On laying the articles aside, we made the remark, 'that we could not make the columns of the the sewer for the filth of cities to 'pass through.' It was the immodesty and indecency of the articles, not their Anti-Slavery character, that caused their rejection."

Now with regard to the rejection of my articles by Mr. Hibbard, I do not care a fig; indeed, from the moment of hearing of his election, I had looked forward to just such a result, so I am not disappointed. For we knew the men in our Conference has summered and wintered him; nay, had tested him, sounded him, fathomed him, and weighed him in our Anti-Slavery balance and found him wanting. But the uncalled for, unceremonious manner of dragging my signature into the battle of his own defense, I do most stoutly protest against, as an act of personal injustice to me. Thus, indirectly at least, forestalling public opinion in regard to matter now passing through the press in book form.

But it is in perfect keeping with the whole course of his administration thus far, evincing much less good generalship than stubborn persistency in his course, right or wrong—sink or swim. But says Mr. Hibbard, "we have never refused to publish Anti-Slavery because it was Anti-Slavery." Now, Mr. Editor, there is a mighty difference between Anti-Slavery in theory, and Anti-Slavery in practice; or, in other words, he cold Anti-Slavery sentiments and the practical working of Slavery—such as its prisons, tears, whippings, concubinage, deaths, &c. At least, it is so according to the doctrine of our now Editor, who by the way, has lately been dubbed with a , since which he may have discovered some new law in morals which will justify his position. We shall see.

"The articles (says Mr. H.) contained detailed accounts of the immorality, concubinage, and licentiousness of New Orleans." That is true, for, after having given, in some preceding numbers, an outside glance of the which was both a dark and damning sight to look upon, I followed three slave mongers a step lower and unmasked partially so, at least, their great Goddess, and discovered forms and features which frightened the poor Editor.

The import of his protest is cover it up, cover it up, cover it up. we can't endure the sight! Cover it up, cover it up, cry the whole South. For Heaven's sake, cover it up or the world will see it! Cover it up? No, it shall never be covered up, for the right arm of the Great Jehovah hath laid it open, and heaven and earth will sooner pass away than it shall be covered up.

"We could not make the columns of the the sewer for, the filth of cities to pass through."

Thank you for the compliment Mr. Northerner then my articles are the filth of cities, and your worthy predecessor, with the ten different Editors who copied them into their columns, are common street scavengers, are they? Bravo! Bravo! I to the new Editor. "Go on, my dear , you are doing a wholesale business; you are just the kind of stock, we want to make Anti-Slavery capital out of about three times.

An old saying is, "If a man will hang himself, don't hang him." There is no need of any one's erecting a gallows for you, sir, for the reflux tide you are creating is rapidly carrying your and old barque, with all sails set and colors sailed to the mast, hand on to the breakers. And then it can hardly be expected that Southern tears for their can wash out the history of your glorious reign.

"It was the immodesty and indecency of the articles that caused their rejection."

Really, indeed too immodest, too indecent for the public gaze. We read in the good book of those who could strain at a gnat and swallow a camel, but we don't say so of our fastidious, sensitive Editor—no, no; but it must be apparent to all that a man who can be so far moved by Southern tears, as to allow himself to be transformed into a pro-slavery tool, and then crammed down the throat of five Conferences, stands in need of a few more degrees of divinity than we are prepared to believe our new in possession of.

Portions of Moses, and the Prophets, Jesus Christ, and the Apostles, must shock hi sensibilities.

Away with such delicate fastidious, contemptible, cowardice, that, thus bows, blushes, and apologizes for rebuking the devil and his imps of wickedness.

How are we to grapple with this nameless, shameless, monster in our midst now preying upon the vitals of our own country and corrupting the world unless we go down into its own dark den and drag it out to the gaze of world? No milk and water trash will do it Sir, the South know the man whom they selected to surplant Mr. Hosmer, his course has fully justified their wisdom. The instinct of Slavery is a ruinous ubiquity.

ARGUS.