previous next

The Committee of reception in reply to the Slanders of the New York Times.

We subjoin the declaration of the committee of reception upon the Prince of Wales, visit to this city, regretting only that it was not made long ago. It is but too true that truth is lame, while falsehood travels with the rapidity of lightning. A falsehood uttered by a worthless rascal, who was apparently sent here for no other purpose than to libel us, has been circulated in England; has been eagerly seized upon by the London Times as an excuse for denouncing us as the very offscouring of the human race; has, in a word, accomplished its errand of mischief — and now, undo who can what it has done. The committee, in our opinion, acted most unwisely in deferring this declaration so long. No man in these days of newspapers and rapid circulation of intelligence, can afford to shut himself up in his own dignity, and leave it to time to do justice to his character when it is assailed. No man can neglect the smallest lie published to his disadvantage, without manifest danger to his reputation. Truth, they tell us, is mighty, and it will prevail.--And so it is, and so it will, after the victim of a lie shall have been ruined beyond the power of mortal redemption — after his prospects shall have been destroyed, his hopes blasted his health shattered, his heart broken — after his body shall have been laid beneath the clove of the valley. And as it is with the individual man, so it is with a community. It cannot afford to overlook any lie, no matter how insignificant in itself, or how worthless the source from whence it proceeds. It should be taken always at the first hop — denounced at once, flung back in the teeth of the slanderer. We much regret that the committee did not make this publication before.

It appears, then, that the reporter of the N York Times was in lodgings in a corner of the city, and that he staid there during the whole time of the Prince's visit. We were going to say that he saw nothing of what he describes; but that is a matter of course. He could not have seen it, for it did not happen. We will amend our statement, therefore, and say that had things happened as he pretended, he could not have known it personally, for he could not have seen what was going on. At the same time, he might very easily have ascertained the whole truth, had he been so disposed. But it suited his purpose to manufacture a malicious lie. He was doubtless sent here to write a libel upon us, because we were slaveholders, and it suited the purpose of the New York Times to represent all slaveholders as vulgar brutes, incapable of behaving with even decency, far less propriety.

The lies of the London Times' correspondent are all copied from the correspondent of the New York Times. One lied deliberately; the other copied his lies, and the New York Tribunes, supporting one batch of lies by the other, says that the New York Times must tell the truth, because the London Times says the same thing. The correspondent of the London Times was not even in the city. He stopped in Baltimore, and staid there all the time the Prince was here.

The gusto with which the London Times returns to this favorite subject is refreshing. "Delenda est Carthage" is now the only word the Thunderer has for Richmond. Richmond must be destroyed, not by war, pestilence and famine, not by fire and sword, not after the fashion of Carthage or Jerusalem, but by neglect. No royal cortege is hereafter to enliven its doomed streets — no royal hope of a King-loving people is to breathe its polluted atmosphere — no magnanimous Briton is to sport his burly carcass from this day forth within its accursed precincts. The decree has gone forth. From this day, Richmond must look to her own spit-boxes; John Bull will no longer supply her with inspectors. She must depend upon her own unassisted imagination for fifty ideas in connection with hip-baths and spit-boxes, and all the abominations so congenial to John's taste. John will not condescend, henceforth, to enlighten her even upon the condition of his belly, upon the stuffing he undergoes at dinner, upon the washings of his feet, the condition of his sheets, or any of the little private incidents which figure so largely in all he has heretofore written about here. John will come here no more. The London Times says the Prince ought not to have come here, and surely, no loyal Englishman will go where the heir apparent ought not to go.--Here is what it says:

‘ The truth is, Richmond is a place which the Prince should never have been taken to visit. If there be a place justly odious to the feelings of Englishmen and their sovereign. It is that where the human anomaly which is now almost the only produce of Virginia, is ruthlessly sold for consumption in the dreary plantations of the South. From such a spot every humane and intelligent traveller turns aside with invincible repugnance, and we can hardly regret that those who were so ill-advised as to turn aside from their path to come in contact with this abominable traffic should have a specimen of the quality of the population that subsists on the buying and selling of human flesh. ’

Considering that a large proportion of the Queen's revenue is derived from duties upon the products shipped to her by this race so accursed in her sight, this denunciation will do pretty well. We only wish that it did not bear too great a resemblance to the "Fence," reproaching as a rascal the person from whom he receives his stolen goods. If we are rascals for owning and selling negroes, what are the British purchasers of the products which these slaves create? What is the Queen herself, who derives a revenue from them? What is the Parliament, and what is the Ministry?

We have wandered too far from our purpose, which was to lay the subjoined paper before the public:

Visit of the Prince of Wales to Richmond

It is marvelous now fast a lie will travel, and how difficult it is to put a stop to it when once the steam is up. When the account of the reception of the Prince of Wales in Richmond first appeared in the New York Times, it was apparent to the committee of the Council and citizens, that some professional Munchausen of the press had been employed to promulgate a wholesale slander upon the people of Richmond; and that the article had been accordingly manufactured out of the raw material of falsehood to suit the demand.

The committee knew positively and personally that not a word was true relating to the insults alleged to have been offered in the Capitol or elsewhere; that no event transpired, and no word was uttered, which could give the least color to the statement in the "Times." They were aware of the fact, on undoubted authority, that the correspondent of the "Times," though in the city, was confined to the house, in a remote part of the suburbs, during the whole of the day, and was not an-eye-witness of any of the scenes he pretends to describe. Yet they did not choose to dignity the petty malice which originated a foul slander upon a whole community, by giving it the importance attached to a public denial. Their guests expressed themselves, and snowed themselves, gratified with the reception accorded them, and that was enough. It was altogether immaterial whether the diseased part of Northern sentiment was propitiated or not, and the sound portion could be relied on to recognize the character of the statement by the source it came from, and the features of untruth upon its face. When the Duke of Newcastle publicly denied the truth of every allegation, it was natural to suppose the wrong would have been confessed, and the charge put at rest. Yet, more recently the London Times has taken up the hue and cry, and to this hour the New York Times and its kin are trying to make themselves and their readers believe it by the force of repetition. The slander travels at a pace which makes it hopeless that the truth can ever overtake it. Having reached the people of England, who may be innocently misled into the belief that it has some foundation, if now becomes a duty to the people of Richmond, of the State, and to all who yet retain a regard for our national reputation, that the proper stamp should be placed upon it by those who had charge of the reception of the Prince, and were personally present during the entire visit to the Church, the Capitol, and the Governor's House; and, accordingly, we take public notice of it, and declare it a sheer fabrication, from beginning to end.

The Committee of reception.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

hide Places (automatically extracted)
hide People (automatically extracted)
Sort people alphabetically, as they appear on the page, by frequency
Click on a person to search for him/her in this document.
Munchausen (1)
John Bull (1)
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: