The voice of freedom. [volume], July 20, 1839, Image 1

About The voice of freedom. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1839-1848

Image provided by: University of Vermont

                
FREEDOM
ALLEN & POLAND, Publishers. Published under the sanction of the Vermont Jlnii-Slavery Society. . CIIAUNCEY L. KNAPP, Editor.
VOLUME I. MONTPELIEB, VERMONT, JULY 90, 1S39. IV I'M BISK SO.
m From tlis Vermont Chronicle,
Mr. Traoy, From the perusal of the enclosed
letters, you will perceive that their original design
was that of publication. After receiving the letter
from -Dr. Lord, I hesitated, about the propriety
of publishing them, as it appears to me very
questionable whether the interests of the
churches would be thus at nil promoted. It was
in confidence of a different answer, and such as I
supposed a sober and considerate abolitionist might
give, that I first formed the design that these let
ters exhibit. The end I had in view, and the qui
eting and restraining influence which I sought for,
will not be attained by the publication of the pres
ent communication. But on the other hand, I
have hesitated to assume the office of censor; for
while the author of the letter must bear the respon
sibility, he also must judge of that which will be
safe and useful for men at the present time. I
would not seem to withhold a publication because
different from my sentiments, when, had it been
figrceable to them, I should have regarded its dif
fusion proper and useful. Z. B.
LETTER 1.
Quechee, April 16, 1S39.
To Rev. Nathan Lord, D. D., President, fyc.
Resfectfd Sir: I take the liberty of addres
sing to vou a line respecting your views of Abo
litionism, or what, under that name you are willing
to sanction. 1 have no excuse for this but the in
terest of the churches, which I think are manifest
ly involved in it. I live and labor as a minister
of the gospel, within the sphere of your influence,
and my heart is assured that you have no willing
ness that your name or influence be used to up
hold any doctrine, or urge forward any course of
conduct, at war with the best interests of the King
dom of Christ, and subversive of the order and
peace of his churches, no less than of the humility
and unostentatious graces of his members.
Respected Sir, I find it a fact, that men. are tak
ing courses deeply involving the best interest
and the order, of the churches, and when pressed
by men or by conscience for their authority in
such a course when questioned whether they as
sume tne whole upon uieir own responsibility and
certainty of personal duty, they uphold themselves
by reference to men like yourself, who are reput
ed abolitionists in the the churches, and whose
wisdom, and whose Christian character, they re
gard as authority enough authority not only re
specting sentiments thus named, but paramount
respecting action, to that of pastors in their own
spheres. It is thus they cover abolition measures
from censure in all places and under all conditions,
and finally release themselves, in so weighty a
cause, and with such authority, from all other ob
ligations which might seem to lay a restraint up
on them.
It is, of course, assumed by them (but I doubt
not without reason) that yourself and others, by
acknowledging the title of abolitionists, admit, in
the spirit of some of that name, that every man, in
nil conditions, and without restraint from any ex
isting relation in the churches, is bound, or at
Jeast privileged, to move that subject, and lead,
and agitate, and urge men on in the good cause.
It pains me to see tho cause of the churches so
suffer from what I believe to be false, and sup
ported upon false impressions of the authority
of good and wise men. For I cannot believe that
you, Sir, have ever intended to encourage so dis
orgrnizing a doctrine. It is, I think, almost im
possible that a well-disiplined- mind should have
studied the interests of the Church, and earnestly
have prayed for them, without learning an oppo
site doctrine, and feeling the importance of it
to a healthful piety. I have thought, therefore,
that you would be willing to answer a few sober
inquiries upon this subject that you would be
willing, in view of the fitness, might f not add jus
tice, of it, that your answer should be made pub
lic, and that, of course, you would answer them
as one who would see and feel the bearing of his
answer upon the well-being and inheritance of
Christ in his saints whom he has purchased
with his blood.
The first inquiry which I wish make is, respect
ing the duty, in this matter, of private or lay
members in the churches. If it is not their duty
to assume the lead and management in all reli
gious matters, upon their own responsibility, have
they anv authority for doing so in this ? Is it the
duty or the privilege of a private member, in op
position to the judgment or the wishes of his pas
tor, to move this excitable matter, and insist upon
agitating the church and the community with it ?
Is it his duty has he any authority for it or is it
only the result of arrogance and presumption?
Have such men your authority in such proceed
ings? or do you, hold any doctrine by which you
would release such men from their relative obli
gations to their Pastors as "the leaders of God's
people ?
The second inquiry which I wish to make may
include the duty of laymen, preachers, and men in
pll conditions of life. Have itinerant laymen or
preachers any authority from the nature of this
cause, from God, o"r from any doctrine of yours,
for moving this subject within the proper sphere
of a pastor's labors, but against his judgment, and,
as he believes, n opposition tQ his labours and
usefulness in the service of hjs Master ? Is .the
pastor's judgment to have no weight except on one
side? Is not he to be consulted first respecting
the wants of his people ? Is not he to be the judge
what will be an assistant and what an adversary
to himself, in his labors for the souls of men ? Is
it to be considered a merit to thrust these things in
fo all the churches, let the pastor's views and feel
ings be as they may the greater merit, and de
serving the more praise, to stir this matter, be
cause the pastor laments its introduction, as that
which must most entirely, for a season at least,
frustrate his own labors ? The sum of their doc
trine on this point seems to be that no one has a
right to restrain them in moving the subject, but
they have a Tight to forbid, and efficiently prevent
all others from letting it alone.
These considerations, respected Sir, I have ven
tured to submit to you, trusting my justification
in ine tiling to your own deep interest in all af-
fecting the prosperity of the churches, and your
isl
ance to those who labour and pray for the
perity of Zion. I am, Sir, &c.
pros
Zenas Bliss
v LETTER 11.
Dartmouth College, May 30, 1S39.
Rev. Z. Bliss : Dear Sir, Yours of the 10th
of April was received as I was sotting out
journey to fhtNorth. Various engagements hav
prejetfnTd a recurrence to it till now
An outline of my views on the subject of slave
ry and abolition was published, a lew years ngo
in tne Vermont Uhroniele, and copied into some
other papers. Those views are unchanged, ex
cept that the convictions, then expressed, of the
evils, moral and political, of slavery, and of the
duty, practibility, and expediency of immediate
emancipation, have been confirmed and settled by
time and longer study of the subieet
I am not a member of any Abolition Society
and my occupations have not admitted of any such
active influence in behalf of the Slave as I should
have felt it my duty and my privilege, in other
circumstances, to exert. It is probable, that so Jar
as any persons have been allected by my opinions.
which, notwithstanding your suggestions, cannot
1 think.be very considerably, the publication refer
red to has been their principle source of informa-
Hon.
I do not retain in my possession a copy of that
publication, and my recollection ol the more inci
dental parts ol it is not very distinct. Hut 1 be
lieve I expressed distrust of some leaders of abol
lion who were then figuring considerably before
the public, and with whom 1 could not have en
tire sympathy. Their subsequent course has con
tinned the liulgrncnt of their character which
then intimated ; and as I have never expressed or
entertained any other judgment, I cannot consider
mysell as implicated in their errors, ot responsi
bio Jor their measures.
Still less do I consider myself responsible for all
or any oi tne irregularities which may have sprung
up in society, Jar or near, really or apparently
connected with the antt-slavery reformation
I am an abolitionist. I hold to the moral and
political evil of slavery, and to the corresponding
obligation ot all men to attempt the immediate and
entire removal oi it, according to their best jud
ment, and in such modes ol action as are proper
in respect to other moral and patriotic cnternrizes
I am as truly for abolitionism as for Christianity
I 1 .1 .1 .n i i n "
oeieiving ttiem to be essentially related. lint 1
am no more concerned with the follies of any in
dividuals or parties of the one, than of those indi
viduals or sects of the other, vho may have
grafted their own conceits upon the parent stock
And it is proper to add, that 1 shall not feel mv
self called 16 answer for such follies more in the
one case than in the other. I am responsible for
my own opinions, and conduct, and habitual as
sanations. Others most stand or fall to their own
masters.
Thus far in general, in answer to your letter.
Your particular inquiries, as to what measures
under the name of abolitionism, I am willing to
sanction, 1 lind it extremely difficult to answer
want a specific case before me. It were not
little hazardous to approve or condemn the conduct
ol individuals, or classes, in or out of the church
in relation to this subject, without a knowledge of
the lacts. You appear to have been molested by
anti-slavery movements in your congregation, or
vicinity. 1 cannot undertake to speak of them,
one way or another. I would not sanction or dis
allow measures, in general, because they happen
cd to be of thi3 side, or that; nor say aught that
should admit of a decisive bearing upon a given
question, moral or prudential, without an opportu
nity of impartial investigation.
I feel, however, more at liberty to speak in re
gard to a principle, which, if I understand your
inquiries, runs through them all; viz. the para
mount authority of pastors, within the limits of
their respective churches and congregations, over
all other persons, lay-members, preachers, lectur
ers, &e., who would seek to enlighten the com
munity on topics which are claimed to belong to
the sphere of pastoral instruction.
lhat principle, highly as I respect and love ma
ny of those brethren in the ministry, who have, of
late, privately, and in their associations, asserted
it, in different sections of the country, I cannot ad
mit, certainly not in the strictness which they seem
to claim lor it.
Many years ago I studied the history of prinii
tive Christianity in connection with that of 'the
Reformation,' and particularly of the English Pu
ritans, in reference to the question of civil and re
ligious liberty. Since that time I have not belie'
ved that Pastors and Ecclesiastical bodies are the
only proper conservators of the public welfare in
respect to religion and morals, nor that they have
rights, immunities, duties and discretion with
which a stranger may not intermeddle, in refer
ence to all matters and influences affecting the
public sentiment, in these particulars. I admit the
legitimacy and dignity of the ministerial office.
As a Christian minister, and associated with Chris
tian ministers, I claim the courtesy and would ex
ercise the authority properly belonging to such a
relation. But I concede the right of all other per
sons and associations to converse, lecture, hear,
and act on any and all subjects pertaining to indi
vidual and social happiness, when and where they
please, (provided they do not interfere with the
freedom of other men's opinions and engngements
and the authority of the Jaws.) without a license
from the spiritual courts. That Pastors and Ec
clesiastical bodies may set up a claim so general
and imperative, as some even in New England
have done, and which, (you will pardon me for
saying it,) you would seem to vindicate, I cannot
regard but as an unwarranted and dangerous u-
surpation. J'- is virtually the assertion ol a prin
ciple belonging only to the times of the Sanhe
drim, or of the Star Chamber and High Commis
sion. It is to my mind no justification or apology of
certain proud resolutions that have been passed in
some of our ecclesiastical conventions, lhat they
profess no power of enforcing the prerogative
which they arrogate. It is enough that thcycaim
an exclusive privilege, a Divine right of regula
ting me punnc mind. 11 any persons, presuming
to discuss, before the community, topics on reli
willingness, in every proper way, to lend as;
gion or morals, without the advice and consent of
these self-constituted tribunals, yet go unscathed
their impunity will be owing to other principle
in the constitution and laws ol a Irce country
which these very worthy, but as 1 thinlc, misgui
ded brethren, seem either not to have coinprchan
ded, or to have grossly undervalued
That in times when the right of petition is de
nied in our national councils,- and the ungodly
rabble is loincd with more ' respectable portion
of society in preventing discussion on many sub'
iects deeply affecting the public welfare, such
principles should be propounded and maintained
by ministers cf Jesus Christ, and acquiesced in to
any considerable extent, 1 regard as a more unla
vorable indication in respect to the progress
of
civil and religious liberty than any other in the
history of our times. It is the more to be regret
led as an additional evidence of the enfeebled con
dition of Christianity in our country, when the pow
er of conventions nnd of synotlical enactments
is
thought necessary in aid of the simple truths and
institutions of religion. Such a resort has always
been characteristic of a period when the churches
have been perverted by a sensual philosophy, and
the ministry has been crippled by accommodation
to the schemes of commercial cupidity and pohti
cal corruption.
These brethren must have read the history
of
Christianity to little purpose, and have reflected
very inadequately upon the present tendencies of
society, if they could suppose that such a demon
stration would have any other material effect than
to awaken suspicion of their own soundness and
benevolence, and to diminish their influence oth
erwise salutary upon the masses of awakened and
aspiring minds. They should have learned that
God has entrusted the secrets ot wisdom to
privileged orders ; and that light is a rare and
subtle essence that may penetrate as well the crcv
ices of a cabin as the casements of a palace.
they should have remarked the rule ol Uivine
Providence by which in every period of awaken
ing intelligence and freedom God has exalted
himself by the use of comparatively feeble and
ill
reputed instruments, and bringing to nought the
understandings of the prudent.
You will do me the justice not to infer from
these observations that I would countenance every
prolessed reformer who should propose himsell
in that character, to the community, or apologize
for any violations of the proprieties of Christian
intercourse, or the decencies and chanties of com
m6n life. I do not hold myself obliged to hear or
read every thing that other men may sec fit to
speak or publish, and no man may claim patron
age or protection from me in any line of conduct
thatrmy ludgmentehall disapprove, however in
other respects we may be of a similar'persuasion
In respect to many of the exciting occasions of
these times, the question with me is not what
shall do, bufVwhat I should refrain from doing. I
shall not give my influence to what I believe, on
the whole, to be erroneous or injurious. At the
same time I should not set up my judgment with
any show of authority over others, who neither
by the laws ot the land, nor any principles ol
Christianity are made accountable to me for their
opinions or their measures. I shall take care of
my own province according to the rules apnronri
ate to the relations in which the Divine Providence
has placed me. I should not transcend that nat
ural limit to assume the keeping of the public con
science, or prescribe rules for the conduct of oth
er men's affairs. If in this course I meet embar
rassments, I hold them incidental to an imperfeel
condition of society, and use them to correct my
judgment and enlarge my charity. I am not an
swerable lor oppositions and disruptions of lellow-
hip which are the ellcct of honest disagreements,
and not the result of conflicts provoked by mv
own imprudent jealousies and unwarrantable as
sumptions. I shall at least be saved from the uis
quietude of self-reproach, when I have not set up
my own wisdom as the standard of the public mo
rality, nor opposed a barrier to the natural prog
ress ol opinion
In respect to your suggestion of the propriety of
puonsning my opinions, i neg to say mat while 1
1 , , T 1 . I 1 I T
have no desire to conceal tliem, but rather should
regret not to be understood, and lhat my senti
ments should not exert any influence that might
reasonably belong to them, at the same time I do
not feel lhat there is ot present a necessity for self-
mdication, nor that it is my errand to engage in
the public strife. Any use, however, that you
may please to make ot this letter, in its present
form, among those who would care enough about
me or my opinions to attend to what I have writ
ten, 1 should by no means refuse.
1 am, dear sir,
Very respectfully and truly,
Yours, &c. N. Lord,
From the Philanthropist.
Assemblies, Conferences, Conventions.
We said, two numbers since, that " among the
most formidable enemies of the slave, must be reck
oned at present, the General Assemblies, General
Conferences and General Conventions of Christian
churches." We meant all we said.
These bodies, it is understood, represent the
best piety and intelligence of the several churches.
1 he General Conference of the Methodists, par
ticularly, is composed exclusively of preachers.
who are presumed in general to have u more just
appreciation of christian truth, and to feel a deep
er interest in its success, than the laity.
Their great object is, the preservation and ex
tension of sound doctrine and pure morals; all
moral and religious subjects coinc legitimately un
der their notice. Whenever a heresy starts up,
that threatens the integrity of the church, it is
their business to sound the alarm, and testify
against it. Whenever a particular sin, lilting its
head above the rest, endangers the purity of the
church, they feel it to be their duty to point it out
to special reprobation and show its utter hostil
lty to right principle. In a word, they are call
ed upon to guard the health and purity of the
church, set their faces against all error and sin
and especially to act not only against those here
sies or sins which, under the circumstances, threat
en the most serious encroachments on the king
dom of Christ ; but also in favor of those institu
tions or practices, which from existing causes, may
be peculiarly necessary for the promotion of some
vital interest.
So well is thi understood, that no one is sur
prised when these bodies pass solemn resolutions
denouncing lotteries, gambling, intemperance and
sabbath breaking, and recommending sabbath
schools, temperance societies. &c. The duty of
such action is manifest to all,
Suppose one-third of the members of ihe Pros
bytcrian church were addicted to the practice of
sabbath breaking. Many of their brethren, scan
dalized at such conduct, memorialize the General
Assembly on the subject, earnestly praying it to
pass resolutions, setting forth the duty of observ
ing tho sabbath day, and condemning its violation
as sin against Ood. Year alter year similar me
mortals go up, but the Assembly in some cases
will not act upon them ; in others, is shaken to its
centre by excited debates as to the propriety ol con
sidering them, and in every instance, steadily re
fuses to express any opinion, with regard to their
object. We ask, what would be the effect, the
necessary effect, of such conduct ? Plainly, to
secure the sanction and support of the whole
church, to the practice of sabbath-breaking. Thus
the Assembly would bo doing every thing in
its power to destroy the obligation of sabbath ob
servances, short of an act expressly affirming the
non-existence ol such obligation.
We have given a supposed case ; we advert now
to a real one.
Slavery has taken up its abode in the American
churches. It finds a welcome home in the South
ern portions of nearly all the large denominations.
In the cluirch, as in the state, different opinions
concerning it arc expressed, borne call it an evil ;
some a great moral evil ; some a sin ; some, one
of tho vilest sins under the sun ; others will have
it, a Bible institution. Whatever it bo, it lias
rapidly extended itself in form and spiiit, nnd
is now exciting discussion every where. It is
emphatically the question of the age and coun
try, and since the church is so deeply involved
in the practice of slavcholding, it is time its con
stituted authorities should give their opinion upon
it.
Memorials, praying lhat it may be recognized
as a sin, and some action be taken against it, have
of late years been sent up repeatedly lo the bodies
alluded to, .but they have steadily refused to an
swer the prayers of the memorialists. Sometimes
the memorials have been treated contemptuously,
sometimes they have been acted on just far enough
to show that whatever might be the opinions of
free state members, they have suffered themselves
to be subjugated by southern dictation. In no in
stance, have these bodies, representing the piety
and intelligence of the church, been induced to say
that slavery was wrong.
As before in the case ol sabbath-brerking, so
now. in this"5ngtance, we. ask, .what must bo Uie ef
fect of such conduct ? Clearlf , to secure the sanc
tion and support of the moral power of thn church,
to the practice of slave-holding. Is it not then true
that these bodies, whose dicisions, whether ex
pressed or implied, upon moral and religious sub
jects must have weight proportioned to the amount
of integrity and information which men concede
to them, arc among the most formidable enemies
of human liberty ?
lobe more particular, the evils wliicn How
from such recreant conduct are these :
1. With a certain class of persons, the . charac
ter of ministers of the gospel for Jidelily to their
principles is greatly depreciated and their influence
curtailed.
Tn tlin ncliirmtinn nf nnnlllpr rhiSQ rlivtJ In ni
ty itself, is made to sutler detriment; for if those
who are fairly presumed to enjoy most of its light
and favor, can thus find nothing in so unnatural
a crime as slavery to deserve their reprobation,
surely the religion they preach is a worthless
one. Absurd as such reasoning is, still thai
there are many who do thus reason, and by the
immoral time-serving of christian professors are
lit to despise Christianity, is a well known
fact.
. But, a large majority are influenced in a dif
ferent way. Retaining their confidence in these
bodies, and their hold on Christiatity, they learn
gradually to look upon slavery as a kind of misfor
tune, which, though not exactly right, God some
how or other tolerates, and therefore, had better
be let alone. Thus the slaveholder is encouraged,
the public conscience quieted, sympathy for the
slave abated, nnd the few who still struggle to bring
about the year of jubilee, are pressed down by ad
ditional odium, and find new obstacles thrown in
their way. .
! or the blood ol the poor, sullermg captive, uod
will hold these religious bodies largely account
able.
FOURTH OF JULY, 1539.
At Cnzcuovia Mndison County, N. Y.
AN A1I0L1TI0N CELEBRATION.
The fourth of July was celebrated in the after
noon of lhat day in the noble spirit of the fathers,
sixty-three years before. Since the settlement of
Madison county this day has not been more truly
honored and kept up to its ancient spirit, than by
the polished and intelligent citizens of Cazenovia
and adjacent towns. It was a genuine celebra
tion. JSo cannon to burst, no rifles cracking m
ur cars, or muskets bursting over our beads, or
crackers under our feet. The meeting was held
at 2 P. M., in the large Methodist church,
The Rev. Mr. Knapp, having dismissed his pro
cted meeting, opened our celebration with ap
propnate prayer. Aivan iMewnrt, J'.sq., ol uttea,
then spoko one hour and forty minutes on the
.. ,1 c , . n ft it ,
real principles involved in the declaration of in-
ependc'ice, and also on the great question of po
meal economy connected with slavery, dumori-
trating the proposition, that, if the slaves of the
south arc worth 1000 millions, they as freemen
would be worth 2000 millions, because' they would
produce double as freemen what they do now, as
slaves. That slavery being abolished, the white
men of the south would find it no longer dishon
orable to work, and the white men would perform
as much labor as the slaves do now, nmking the
white men worth to the republic 1000 millions
more than they are now, which added to the 2000
millions for the value of the emancipated colored
men, would make 3000 millions, or the trebling
the value of the south, by the abolition of slavery--Then,
said Mr. Stewart, it would nearly double,
the value of the north, by stimulating double, yea,
treble the amount of northern manufacturing cap
ital into existence, and operators of al sorts, whose
business it would be to supply the new consumers
of the south. Every freed colored family would
become a fresh and interesting customed to the,
northern manufacturer. This operation would
benefit the north immensely; and where she, the
north, manufacturers 50 millions for the south,
she would then make 150 millions for the south,
and tho north v-ov.ld then get their pay for their
work, as the south would produce three times as,
much as she does now. - '
Mr. Stewart calculated this would add 2000,
millions to the'norlh by adding 25 per cent, to ev
ery northern acre of land cultivated or uncultiva
ted ; wliich 2000 millions added as gained by the
north to the 3000 millions gamed by the south, or
5000 millions would be the gain made by the na
tion. So if the nation paid 1000 millions to-morrow
to abolish slavery (not because the slaveholders,
are entitled to any thing) but as a matter of polit
ical economy, the nation would make 4000 of dol-,
lars, or double the real value of the nation.
Mr. Stewart struck, in his usual manner, at mai
ny other strong points in support of his positions.
After Mr. S. finished, Mr. Gerrit Smith ad
dressed the meeting for half an hour, when a do
nation was asked, and a most interesting scene oc-.
curred while each sum was gfven and epch name
announced.
The sifm contributed in cash, $2l9,S(i
About SS0 in pledges to be redeemed, 80,00,
S12 was raised and given Emanuel An
dins, thirty-five years a slave, to complete
the payment for his two youngest children
in slavery, 12.0Q
$3 11,801
. The letter marked A was received from 2 3-4
millions of slaves addressed to the abolitionists of
Madison Co., begging 100 to he advanced on their
account, which was duly done. Our house was
crammed from top to bottom. Near 200 went
away it was said, who could not get in for want
of room. It was one glorious day.
Ul'E WHO WAS TIIEKE.
To the Abolitionists of the County of Madison :
Beloved Friends None havoa deeper, riono
feel a livelier interest in your success than we do.
Wo should love to be with vou at vour meeting
the 4th of July. It would be an unspeakable re-
icl to tell you our sorrows, and show you our
scars on that occasion, liut tins relier and this
gratification are denied us. We should love to
send up a donation to your treasury. But wo
have no money. If one or more of you would
ftontribute.f 100 for us, we should, in the event of
your success, be able, arid as willing as able, to re-;
pay the sum with large interest. ''
Excuse the necessity we are un.der of employ
ing a friend to write this letter for us. You know
that we are forbidden by law to learn to read or
write. We remain,
With strong affection,
Your friends and brethren,
their
The 2 3-1 millions jxj of American slaves
mark.
Dat.nl, Southern Prison House,
June, 1S39.
AMERICAN SLAVERY AS IT IS TESTI
MONY OF A THOUSAND WITNESSES.
This book has come to hand at last, And the
reason it did not reach us sooner shows the avid
ity with which it is sought, and something of tha
effect it is designed to produce. Several mdivid
nls, living in different directions, undertook to
bring copies here, but did not succeed, as there
was such an anxiety to read the book that they
could not retain a single copy. Though publish
ed two months ago, it was not until within the
last week lhat a copy came to this place, We
thought we were prepared by the extracts we had
seen, and the accounts given of it by the press, tq
appreciate the work. But we were never more
mistaken. No extract, unless the whole be ex
tracted, can convey an adequate idea of it. Nq
description can do justice to it. We hadsuppos-t
ed it was a mere record of facts and cruelties, cal
culated to reach the sensibilities of those yyhq
have never embraced the cause of the slave, as a
matter of principle- that it would answer the oft
repeated question, "Are such cruelties practiced
upon the slaves, as the abolitionists represent?"
And that it would waken into life those whq
would rest quite easy over the other wrongs of
the slave, provided he was tolerably fed and cloth -s
ed, and not too severely whipped. And it is a
book of facts, and will reach that class of minds.
If ever the senseless inquiry is again made, the
inquirer should nave a copy ot the work put intp
his hands. But it is also a book of principles, as
well as lacts. jt is iroin the pen ot incodorelJ.
Weld, and it could nol be otherwise than a book
of principles. It docs indeed show the cruel treaU
merit the slaves receive, and the barbarous con
duct ol tiieir masters, lint it shows also . what
we have always maintained, the insepcrnblc con
nection heiween these, abuses and the slave sys
tem itself. It shows the radical principles of tho
system, its necessary evils. As a book of fact?,
then, in couueeltj):- jyijhits principles, wo think it
invaluable. Olcrfay hcan.
William' 'rinliiiey,
This celebrated, lawyer nnd orator, it is well
known, was n Marylander.' He lived nt a period
when slavery had not done its perfect work on tho
heart and intellect of the country. On some pub
lie occasion he uttered these prophetic and omiiii
ous words : " For me, sir, nothing fpr which. 1.
have not the evidence of my senses, is made clearer;
than that this system of bondage will one dTSy des?
troy that reverence for liberty, wliich is the vita
principle of a republic."
What Win. J inkney here predicted, has rome to.
pass among us. 1 hat " one day he foretold, has
arrived. " Reverence for liberty" is unknown
among the people of the land the great mass of
ihe people, inducing, at least, most of the liigjt