Rensselaer Gazette, Volume 3, Number 14, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 27 July 1859 — Daniel E. Sickles. [ARTICLE]

Daniel E. Sickles.

The New York Heratd contains a letter from the Hon. Daniel E. Sickles, in which he corrects a statement made in that paper regarding the recent event in his domestic relations. “The reconciliation” he says, was “my own act without consultation with any relative, connection, friend ot adviser whatever. Blame, if any belongs to the step, should fall upon me. lam prepared to defend what 1 have done before the only tribunal I recognize, having the highest claim to jurisdiction ■ ver the subject—ray own conscience and the bar of Heaven. lam not a.vare of any statute or code of morals which makes it infamous to forgive a woman; nor is it usual to make our domestic life a subject of consultation with friends, no matter how near or dear to us; and I cannot allow /•ven, all the world combined, to dictate to me the repudiation ot my wife when I think it right to forgive her and restore her to my confidence and protection. I. lever failed to comprehend the utter desolate position of an offending though penitent woman, the hopeless future with all its dark possibilities of danger to which she is doomed when proscribed as an ou cast, I can now see plainly in the almost universal howl of denunciation with which she is followed to my threshold, the misery and perils from which I have rescued the mother of my child, and, although it is very sad for me to incur the blame of friends and the reproaches of many wise and good people, I shall strive to prove to all who feel any interest in me, that if I am the first man who has ventured to say to the world, an erring wile and mother may be forgiven and redeemed; that in spite ot all the obstacles of my path, and good results of this example shill entitle it to the imitation of the generous and the commendation of the just. There are many who think that an act of duty proceeding solely from affections, which can only be comprehended in the heart of a husband and a father is to be fatal to my professional, political and social standing. Ji this be so, then “so be it. lolitical station, professional success, and social recognition are not the only prizes of ambition, and so long Ido nothing worse than to reunite my family under the roof where they may find shell.-r from persecution, I do not tear the noisy but ff eting voice oi popular clurpor. The multitude accept the first imiire-mori i ... o-.v, mil in the end men think fu; ‘ s, >n > I k»i »w the hum .n hear., (. » < iniak th it i a Cit»'t-1 of ii.r.,; -.i *‘f..-,<ii. <■ and storm I ha'.y e,.a. y r“ deptns.)

I may re-assure those who look with reluctant forebodings upor, tn y future, to be of good cheer, tor I will-not cease to vindicate a just claim Vo the respect of my fellows; while toother, motley groups here and there, who lo<sk upon my misfortunes only as weapon? tor my destruction, to those I say, once tor all, “If a man make good use of his enemies they will be as -serviceable to him as his friends.” In conclusion let me ask only one favor ot those who, from whatever motive, may d’em it necessary or agreeable to eomnrent in public or private upon thia sad history, and that is, to aim all thei* arrows at my breast, and for the sake of my innocent child spare her yet youthful mother, while she seeks in sorrow and contrition the mercy of Him before whom, sooner or later, we must all appear.” The Indianapolis Journal comments as follows upon the above letter: “If there was nothing to it fluence our opinion of the man or his act bu’ this letter, «e should pronounce it manly, ensible, and even noble. We have rar-ly seen any publication of higher tone, or more generous sentiments. Rut unfortunately we are not permitted to judge of Mr. Sickle® by this letter. Ther. is much more that must enter into the judgment, and, notwithstanding his protest against the public meddling with his private relations, there is much that oug tto enter into it. Mr. Sickles’ relations to his wife are, as he says, his own atti*ir. But the murder of Key is th ? affair of the public. The act was justified by the abhorrent conduct of the woimn in whose defense he noiy defies the world What must men think ol a m.in. who justifies misUer b the criminality of his wife, ami takes her back to his arms us soon as he has made his defense good! But a lew weeks have passed since her baseness was his secu ily from death, and he urged it by the best law yers he coutd hire, and the widest publication he could procure. Who can feel now that such pleas w re sincere! I M'-. Sickles had acted from the start in the spirit ot this letter, though he had killed a regiment of iveys. th* public would have tolerated, if not applauded him. If he had shown the same tender consideration for his erring wile that he now* does, and manifested through, ut no other purpose than to avenge his dishon>r, with no desire to deepen her shame, we -liould say as he does,the matter is his. and let .ini alone with it. confession he took so much p-rns to get from his wi e, to get attested as a regular legal do. umeut, and to get before the Court, though he knew from the start that it could not. b.- used in <:v deuce; and aft.ei failing to get it beiote the Cour: took pains to spread it all over the world in the newspaper;, nn d actual ly with his own n?.nd gave it to' Harpers to m«ke a sic simi'.e of tor the IVeeAZy, ml prove that his reconciliation no., is the depth of degradation, or ,iis conduct then was the bight of wanton malice.” [Froiu the New Yo.k Herald July 13.