When George W. Cable's now famous article, "The Freedman's Case in Equity," made its appearance in the _Century_ magazine, it proved to be a veritable bomb-shell in the camp of the enemy. It exploded, and immediately there went up a cry from the wounded both long and loud, and far-extended as well, showing that the gun which threw it had been well aimed, and that the shot was an effective one. The newspapers of the South, with few exceptions, did not pretend to answer. They made feeble attempts at ridicule. Mr. Cable's shot must have carried away the heads of many of the editors, for they had surely lost them some way when they assailed Mr. Cable so fiercely in utter disregard of what his article really contained. If the editorials that appeared in the Southern papers, big and little, in annihilation of Mr. Cable and his pestiferous article could be gathered up and published, they would afford very amusing reading. There were, however, a few who took up "The Freedman's Case in Equity" and set themselves to a serious and manly discussion of its positions. Meantime, Mr. Cable has been, laughingly, no doubt, looking at "the tempest in a teapot" which the small fry have created by their foamings and chokings from passion, while he has also been respectfully listening to those who have tried to meet him on the plane of fair discussion. He has been biding his time, waiting for the fury to boil itself out and for those who are really "foemen worthy of his steel" to speak their minds. His time has come to be heard from again, and in the September number of _The Century_, under the title, "The Silent South," he reviews his reviewers in a manner most masterful, in a style most luminous and in a spirit most kind, Christian and courteous. We said at the time that his critics, while dealing vigorous blows, did not have reach enough to find him. They were simply beating the air. A perusal of "The Silent South" confirms what we said. There is actually no need for Mr. Cable to re-argue a single point that he made in his first paper. He is able to quote the words of his opponents in vindication of every claim he made. He drives them back with their own weapons. He has no occasion to defend. He is able to show at the very start that his assailants, instead of touching him, had only gotten themselves into trouble. To get themselves out is more than they are likely to be able to do, for their own words and the facts are against them.