Newspaper Page Text
VERM O N T T E LEG RAP II.
TOL. XV, NO. 52, 2 0G us when Ihey talk about their god being a god of justice. Whenever aoy objec tion is made to the murderous doings o( the Israelite?, in robbing and slaughter ing their enemies in other words their neighbors who had possessions they wanted we are told that the Most High was then a God cf justice, and tbat he selected one of the members of his family as a scourge and employed it to castigate the others. It must not be said, we are told, that it was inhuman or. wrong in the Israelites to butcher helpless women and children. It mast be called the execution of the justice of God. Now I sec, unless 1 um deceived by very great obliquity of vision, a similar thing in what is here done by the Editor of tho Investigator, and elsewhere by others, in giving new names to laws and penalties. Toe Old Testament narrative of the -plundering proceedings of the Israelites makes no such use of language, and asks for none to be made, as is now required, in speak ing of their doings. It reads : " Avenge the children of Israel of the Midianites." Avenge the Lor'd of Midian." Num bers xxx:: 2, 3. Nothing is said here about justice. It is written down honest ly, in plain, unequivocal language ven geance, just as their acts showed their feelings to be, as all may see who will read what follows in the chapter from vhich I have quoted. But now that the human family have lived on to a better age and a better state of things, a3 many as are unwilling to leave those acts where they belong, as worthy of the limes and circumstances which produced them.must give them a diflerent name, that they may the better succeed in getting help to log them along. Sd they must nov be called acts of God's justice. It is so with this whole system of rewards and punish ments. In the progress and improvement of the race, former things are passing away. But it is not generally seen now rapidly the work is going on. And ye there is very generally felt a demand and necessity for calling things by diflerent names. So the Editor of the Investigator talk about " restraining laws," to be us- cd, as he says, instead of laws executing what would be called " retributive jus- ticer 1 do not say that he is wittingly and willingly deceiving himself and oth- ers talhTf matter. 1 oply ay he is in an error if he thinks the distinction he un- dertakes to make can extend beyond the difference in words. And yet the penal- ties are softening. But 'whatever there is left of them 13 a part of tho same nysiern. Violence is violence still. There is only a difference in degree, and in names attached to it. The right j to use one form, measure or degree of it, towards rational beings, under some cir- cumstan:es, is the right to use other forms, measures and degrees of it under other circumstances. The right to command, is the ri"ht to enforce obedience. And herd is where the mischief begins. The issuing of the command is the beginning of hostilities. It is the commencement of aggressive war, which if repelled - and prosecuted, and followed up, can no where end but in the entire extermination ol tne race. lam not sajing that those who have used commands and accompanying violence have not done according to the best of their knowledge generally. I am only saying that I believe there is a high- er and better philosophy in our reach. . In many other things the Editor of the thirsty, it rational, intolerant, dogmatic Investigator reasons from cause to effect, religion ! 1 commend to him an examin Butoothis great matter of Noa-Resist- ation of his own position. Does he not ance, and Rewards and Punishments, it appears to me he entirely abandons his wonted course, and lakes himself to as. eumption and assertion. He assumes and asserts lhatNon-Resistance cannot be car- tied into practice and life preserved. A better examination of the subject will show him that he is wanting both in facts ana pnuosopuy suswm mmu ... u position-or i am vasuy isuwen. a carelal examination oi ma prouueuoa wiu taow mat ne nas dm twin . cuCI one or the oilier to nis support, hb caa alluded to the Quakers. But in doing it what has be done I . Jle has only brought out the fact thit as a class they have not Jived out the Noo-Resistance principle. If such a thing were to the purpose, he woulJ have got, along much fister and farther by bringing forward other classes. For almost all others have been farther from Non-Resistance than the Quakers. JJut hqvv docs it militate against Non-Re-distance to prove thai any class of human beings have not practiced it? ; To sustain himself in his position he must show those .who hate practiced it, and ia it have fill ed cf finding security. And when he has ihor.-n that it his net been a. perfect e urity in crcry isrtzr??, 'lz has not yet gained his point, or mado the least head way against'it. He has not advanced one step against it nntil he iiaj shown t to be lesr salutary and secure than the opposite practice. Here is where I meet him. On the confines, the out posts of the field. I tell him positively that he has no: el got his foot upon it and confidently, that he will not. , Why, he has not even un dertaken to show that the Quakers have not been more secure than others, in pro portion aa they have practiced Non-Re-aistance. To the contrary of this, he knows they have been, if he knows any thing of the facts in the case. And the same is true of all others. The history of the world shows that, as a general thing, those classes who have conducted most peacefully an! forbearingly towards others, have lived in the greatest safety. Examine the history of the Quakers on this point, in connection with the Irish rebellion, and the wars between Great Britain and this country. The history of William Penn, among the Indians, as compared with the history of the -New-England Puritans. While the foimer lived in safety, the tatter were butchered. The history of the Shakers. The his tory of men, in all ages. It h true that in the aggiegate many of the peaceful have died martyrs, during the ignorance, violence and brutishness of men in past times. Bat an incomparably larger pro portion of those who have taken the sword for defense, have perished in its use, than of those who have refrained from violence. Perfect Non-Resistants have rarejy been found. So that little can be affirmed of them, as yet, in the shape of facts. But what facts there are go in support of the principle. But what is wanting in facts, in the in fancy and childhood of the race, is suppli ed by sound philosophy. Does likebe get like? Then violence begets vio jence peacefulness begets peacefulness. Lo7e begets love. Good will begets good w;n. what can be conceived of, more absurd than to say that to refuse to fight jea(js to the destruction of life? ! That to use violence, and thereby increase the amount of it, is the way to bring it into disuse and decrease the amount cf it?! The Ed;lor 0f lQe Investigator says : i ye advise these modern enthusiasts to g;ve up tnis phantom of Non-Resistance, and take some more rational ground for promoting antf establishing universal peaCe." And what more "raiorca ground for promoting and establishing universal peace,,f than to abandon war and practice peaceful ncss? Vhi more irrational than t0 assume and say that war is the legiti mate instrumentality for promoting peace?! rkat killing is the true philosophy for saving life?! Was there ever such an abuse of language or of reason ? And yet the man who talks thus irrationally, begins one of the paragraphs in which he puts himself in such a position and advo cales such doctrine, by saying : " The doctrine of non-resistance, we consider a I mere phantom of the imagination." The j next paragraph, by saying: Any man J who should carry the principles of non- resistance into practice, would be regard j cd as insane with enthusiasm." And the next, and last, by siying : " We advise these modern enthusiasts to give up this phantom of non-resistance." And all .his from a man who is most manfullv land nobly battling against a violent.blood- owe it to himself as an advocate of reason against assumption and dogmatism? In his note alluding to the matter, the week preceding the foregoing piece, he attach M importance to the subject. Let him rason pon it then, and not rave. He says:-" We cannot protect virtue except by resisting vice ; we cannot pro- ie a menu, except oy resisting tnose wno iare aisposea to injure aim. II we nave a ngm, mereiore, to protect, we nave a ngw, a,.o. 10 resist, wasmucn as protec- uon implies resistance.": 'tThe very thin here taken for granted is the question in dispute namely, the rightfulness of us ing violence for protection and resistance. He asserts the thing disputed, and then goes on to draw inferences from his as- seruon. is iais wonny oi one-wno con- otherwise there would he no need of vio demns bigoted, blinded, ignorant religion- lence. Well, if the friend to be injured . ; i r. i . ists, for trampling reason in the dust and suppressing meir intellectual tenaencies jNon-uesistance is oasea on tne idea and tho fact that vtan is true to himself only when he is under the control of mind, That violence comes from his animaf, not from his intellectual nature. To assert, then, that " self defense is the first law of r,atare," or, in the words of the Investi- gator, that V xesuunce is 4 law of nature instituted fir self-defense" amounts to nothing. Defense is no more a law of nature than oTense as I had occasion to show, in reply to Bartholomew Summer, last week. The Editor of the Investiga tor 83 ys : " The peace-maker is never an offender, but he is always a defender. He defends right.and he opposes wrong." A more thorough investigation of this matter will show him that he has under taken to make a distinction here where he cannot carry out the discrimination and make out the difference. What is of fense? What it defense? What is wrong ? What is right ? With whom is the discretion? . Where does the power lie to determine ? Has this Investigator sufficiently investigated the bearing3 of such questions as these on this great mat ter ? There is not room hero to write down the thoughts they call" forth. It would require the space of a volume. Let those who have the power to think, and the courage and fidelity to think, ask themselves these questions, and others that may come in connection with them, and go about answering them for them-j selves in their own minds. Attack and defense are both prompted by man's animal nature, and not by his intellectual or mental. Fighting has a common origin, among men and among the lower animals. It comes from blind impulse, and not from reason and philoso phy. Reason and philosophy may have been employed more or less, in carrying on war, under tho control of the animal impulses and propensities. But the latter are the originators, prosecutors and con trollers of it. The farmer act only as subjects in the case. Human beings fight ing for darainion, or possession, ate doing the same thing with lo.ver animals fight ing for dominion or possession. Go back fir enough in the history c? the race, and you will find men but very little remov ed from the lower animals, in their readi ness to attack, owing to the great prepond erance of their lower nature against their higher- In the present advanced and im proved state of things in many parts ol the world, attack has come to be consider ed dishonorable and wronjj. This comes of the better development of the nobler part of man. In a still better develop ment, defense will be looked upon as ob jectionable and unphilosophical, as attack now is. ..." One of the questions which I have ask ed above, indicates the difficulty of deter mining what is attack, and what defense. Take the ease of flogging, for instance, brought by the Editor of the Investigator, n his former article. The one who flog. ged the other was justified Jjy the Editor. And did he not attack the other ? Prob ably it will be claimed that he was defend ing the weak in the person of the third in dividual, who was attacked, or was aboutpd that nothing else will bring the great to be by the one flogged. But let us ex amine into this case a little. It is easy to conceive that the person flogged might jisi as well claim that be too wa3 defending the right, or opposing the wrong " in the other. For the Editor of the Investigator speaks of ' defending right and opposing wrong," as well as personal defense and preservation. The person flogged may have been very ignorant, and the victim of jealousy and the other bad passions, and so have thought himself imposed upen, and thus viewed the one who spilled his pail of water as his assailant, just as much, as really, and as sincerely, as. he was viewed to be an assailant by the third per son who interfered and flogged him. In the present state of philosophy, and view taken of attack, few fighters will be will ing to be viewed as offenders. Nearly all will claim to be acting on the defense. The Editoj of. the Investigator speaks of cases being supposab'e in which one might be it.duced to inflict great bodily in jury upon a friend, for the sole purpose of protecting another friend from his unjust assault.' This is quite as plausible as an v I thing that he has brought. It is apparent iv more noble, because it look like com jng from a better motive, than if the same violence were done to an enemy. But is it in fact tiny better? Is it more philo sophical to do violence to a friend than to an enemy And when the work is begun where is it to stop? The friend is to be supposed of course to be beside himself I ..... . ... by the one who interferes is beside himself 7 toward the third' friend, where is the war rant that he will not be beside himself towards the one who interferes to his in- jury! Now if the one who interferes has a right to commence the injury, he has a right Scarry it on, So that if the one who is beside himself should be made rcore beside himself with the increase of injury, and so rise and continue and in- crease in violence, the end must be the de struction of the one, ox the other, or both, or all. v If it be supposed that the one who interferes is to succeed by convincing the other of his kind intentions, blow and yi olence are the wrong means to convince him with under the circumstances. An enraged man will be the more enraged by violence. If he be already sufficiently enraged with a friend to be ready to do him injury, he is too much enraged to re ceive violence from another friend with kindness. Nothing but kindness, peace fulness and gentleness can do him good. And besides, what right have you to in jure him, more than he to injure another ? To injure him is at least to make yourself like unto him in his violence, if not to make yourself worse. It may be that the circumstances which led him to set aside reason and resort to brute force,, render him more excusable than you could be in your circumstances. You throw away reason with greater apparent deliberation and willingness. For I undertake to say that 'your reason is made subject to your feel in s: in the case. For no man will " in- .... . fiict great bodily injury upaa a friend," while he himself is under the control of reason and philosophy. This is not say ing he may not be a great reasoner and philosopher in other matters, and bring much of philosophy and reason into exer cise in the use of bad means to conduct the case and dispose of it. It is only denying that the highest and best pan of his nature ii at the helm. Look at it. The case supposed is where one is to interfere be tween two friends, to prevent the one from injuring the other. The one who has commenced the unjust assault," or is about to commence it, is enraged of course. No matter by what means his bad pas sions have got the ascendant. The less the occasion, ihe more piiiab!t hia coodi i tion, on the principle that the weak are ' more deserving of pily than the strong, ! and that, other things being equal, the claim for pity is in proportion to the weak ness. If there be pit to bestow, I main lain that tha true philosophy and the right reason require ks bestowal where it is most needed that it i most needed where there is the greatest weakness, and that the more " unjust the assault," the greater the weakness manifest. To inter fere wiih violence is only to add fuel to the fire. Only love can displace wrath. If there is not power to exercise this, there is not power to do the greatest good. All this is not saying that there are not degrees of cfoodness and badness in the ex ercise of physical power, in contests among men. It is only saying that the application of the true philosophy will do away with all violence. That the way to lessen violence is to refrain from creating more in addition to what alreadv exists. brotherhood into harmony and happiness. VERMONT TELEGRAPH. Brandon, "lYettncaday, Cct. 4, 1S43 PROSPECTUS. Will he devoted to Universal Inquiry, General Rrforvi, and Perpetual Progress. It will be a medium of communication for mind at large. A place where those who dare to think, and to make known their thoughts, may express them on their own responsibility. It is believed that the time has fully come for the world to have one Free Paper in it. Such a paper has never yet existed, and does not now ex ist. .' v.-.-V These frank expressions of design and conviction do not come, it is believed, from arrogance cn the one hand, nor from con tumely on the other, but from a sincere desire to do good by calling attention to things as they are and as they ought to be..- AW the papers now in existence are partial. They have their separate bounds and "limits.-. Not one of them is devoted to free discussion. They have their degrees of freedom. Some have a great measure of it compared with others. All of them may be doing what thev deem best. But they are all f. -tie red and confined. Some of them have travelled on beyond others. But all hate found their places, fixed on their locations, taken their positions, set tled down and stopped. Not one is trav elling on, any faster than it is carried by the current. Not one acts from the view that man is a progressive being? One is an organ for this sect in religion anoth er tor that. One is an instrument for one society another for another. AM are tied up to their particular idejis. to the exclusion of others. All have their par tial objects to gain, and treat others as ex traheous. . - " ;;" - ,: The inevitable lei.dtncy is to unbal ance everything. To make devotees to . party interests. To promote exclu siveness. To confine to limited views. To give obliquity of vision. To shut up to single ideas. To destroy proportions. To create disharmony. To distort. To exaggerate. To magnify faults on the one hand and excellencies on the other. To make enemies. To breed strife and ill will. "To framing iron bedsteads for chopping and stretching viciims. To straining at small things and swallowing large ones. In a word, the press, like other instrumentalities in the interests of existing institutions, is made to be a tool a dependent, cowering, cringing slave. Here and there a detachment of it, ' under the control of a master mind as much as it is allowed to be, is doing nobly, com pared with what is done by others. But the best of them are wasting their ener gies on effects, while trie causes are left little disturbed. - A noble philanthropy hJs been display ed against intemperance, impurity, slave ry, and war. But it has accomplished little more than the cutting down and de stroying of the bad products of a vitiated soil, without staying the hands diligently at work adding vile stimulants and sow ing foul seed. What does it avail to emp ty brothels in cities, and leave mothers in the surrounding country fitting their daughters, with unnatural food and cloth ing, for filling them up continually as fast as they are emptied I To what does it amount to destroy the works of violence in the particular form of slavery, so call edr without touching in community at large the mercenary spirit that produces it, and that will produce other forms of violence to lake and keep the place of it I What the use of declaiming ogainsv war and violence, and at the same time sup porting x Janus-faced religion, the gntts of whose temples are alwaj's- open for blood-s&edding ? Little. Very little. A large pioportion of our Moral Re form advocates are living in licensed whoredom,, and are stimulating and nest ing their blood, and thus keeping it up, by the most unnatural and abominable ap plications the human system will bear; and by those it will not bear for it is worn out under them at half its natural age, and with a wretched fragment of its Jeffiiiniate usefulness. The most of our Temperance votaries are in the same ia consistencies. It is not an uncommon thing for a Temperance lecturer, so call ing himself, to be seen with a pipe, a ci gar, or a cud of tobacco in his mouth and then filling his stomach with dead flesh, grease, gravy, uoripa vegetable, salt, pepper, rpice, ginger, nutmeg, cloves, cinnamon, vinegar ; and washing down the whole with scalding tea and coffee. Our Temperance taverns and stores are selling and serving up all i.iese and other ! pernicious things, while they are denounc ing their neighbors as murderers for add ing to them the single item of alcohol. The things here enumerated as inconsist ent with Temperance, are all equally in consistent with Purity. They inflame the blood and create every hurtful and abominable lust. The Abolition ranks are chiefly filled up, as to numbers, with those who are ex-? ercising tyranny and oppression, in various Lrms and ways. They sell as high as they can, and buy as low as they can. They take advantage of the ignoiance of their neighbor?. They suppoit and help carry on a sjstem of things that makes it fjr their interests to keep their neighbors in ignorance, for the sake of getting ad vantage of them. They traffic in bread. They buy and sell that which is necessary to the supply of blood and the support of life. They virtually deny to others the right to live, by extorting from them a price for lh privilege of filling their stomachs and keeping their hearts and lungs in motion. Such are they v ho are boisterous for freedom. Their cries of robbery and piracy against the slavehold er, chime very much with the cry of mur der fi om the seller of sail, pepper, tea and tobacco, against the seller of rum. Non-Resistants are very generally sup porting a violent and monstrous system of rewards and punishments. A system of revenge, anger, fury, hatred and re- lentlessness. They imprecate fiery in dignation upon the heads of evil doers. They threaten and put in fear, by point ing the disobedient to the most revolting and awful storms of wrath, rage and tor ment, infinitely exceeding inquisitorial tortures. Large numbers of them pay a priesthood for ruling the people with iron hands and tiding: over them with iron ..... O feet. They too, with the abolitionists, lay violent hands upon th? bands and throats of iheir neighbors, and say, stop eating, stop wearing, stop livingunless you pay us our price for the privilege. They take away knowledge from the people drive out the widow, houseless and help! less, and snatch the mnmi . starving children. Thes . .. . --.i num. ner e are a part of the inconsistpnrioQ nf tvt r . v w. iuu-iesis:auts. Such are some of the things done by Ihe classes who are among those that are doing the most and the best that has yet been afforded for poor, struggling, gasp. ing humanity. What is here dene by way of pointing them out, is not to be tak en as reproach or accusation. It comes from a deep and abiding conviction that the utterance of them is necessary to ih better progress of reformation. The ex posures are not blov3 or thrusts from r.n assassin, but cuts from one who woulj, with what little skill he possesses, act the part of a faithful surgeon. ' And if the disclosures exhibit such a state of things in ihe soundest and best parts, what is to be expected and looked for elsewhere in the system of movements that claim to have for their object ihe ben efit of mankind 1 If such be the situation of those who are foremost, what must b3 the situation of those who are behind them 1 If these be the highest, what are the lower and the lowest? If 'those who are best entitled to be called philanthro pists have not got beyond or above such doings, what are patriots, partyins, clan ists, cabalists about ? If this be the work of philosophers, what is the work of re ligionists? If they who have been shed ding the most light on the paths of men, are yet themselves clothed with so much darkness, in what midnight shrouds muse ihose be enveloped who have less, nnd still less? If ihe few who are cried out against as' innovators and destruclionisis, can only exhibit such capubiliih-a and accomplishments, what must be the imbe cility und inefficiency of the conservators who have raised the cry ? and what the deplorable condition of the deluded multi tudes who are looking to the latter Lr help and salvation ? The truth is, there is nothing in our church and state establishments which rec ognizes man as a being formed for im provement. They are deadweights up on him, They retard his progress. They suppress his nobler, his onward and upward aspi rati They demand to be treated and are treated as 'ends, and not as meahs Works of men's hands though ihey be, they ore the gods that men have worshipptd,. and do worship. Honor, for tune, liberty and life are sacrificed without stint, in support cf creeds and consii.ulioi s. The szcrifues are worth infinitely moie- - - than the gods ! Everything rational nnd real ha3 been thrown upon the altar and consumed b: fore the mvsterious and the imafjinurv. The present has been held in "veneration and awe of the past, and in fear and fore boding of the future. The living have .been 'immolated upon the graves of tli dead. Science and philosophy have teen thrown under the crushing cais of super stition aud ignorance. The solutions and demonstrations of to-djy hare been set aside, because tiipy could not be recorcil ed with the assumption', impoaitiens and vagaries -of yesU rd iy. .Knowledge- has been clamored down under the Ephesian cry that hes made it infidelity. .Men have been kept from practical goodness by being told that it was cut cf their reach, and that if they could reach it it would avail them nothing, They have been taught that the standards cf wisdom and virtue are behind them, and not lefare iheai. That it is impious to .think' of be, ing wise above what is written in books, and audacious to attempt to transcend for mer generations. The progiess that is chattered about in our schools and our churches is backwards ! Studen's in tbefe institutions are taught that it is more than enough for them to arrive at the exper ience of ages gone by. These institutions have' always hinder ed progression. The most important dis coveries and inventions of men have been brought to the knowledge and put in ihe possession of the people, against the com bined powers of church and stale, in all ages. It is a mistake and a delusion to suppose that these institution?, as such .aid general jmprovement. Tbey have al ways been nightmares upon knowledge and humanity. Advancement has been made in spite of them, by the native ener gies of manhood in individuals, struggling up from under their overwhelmingly op pressive influences. Not only have ihey not originated or produced improvement?, but they have, with few exceptions, n-et inventive individuals at the threshboM and imposed injunctions or monopolized the advantages. Even the government of the United States, professing to fce the most