The voice of freedom. [volume], August 31, 1839, Image 1

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

Image provided by: University of Vermont

                
T Bl
YOICE
ALLEN &. POLAND, Publishers. Published under the sanction of the Vermont Anti-Slavery Society. CIIAUNCEY L KNAPP Editor
VOTjUITIE I. MOiTPELIER, YEKlflONT, AUGUST 31, 1809. N WWBER 35
if sua Vs3,nj3iai &w
2k
From the Emancipator.
DEBATES IN THE ANTI-SLAVE II Y CON
VENTION. (continued.)
Wednesday P. M., July 31.
The first resolution on political action being un
der consideration,
Rev. Mr. Cornish of N. Y. addressed the con
vention. He said that he was opposed to the res
oluuon, in part, and honed it would not prevai
He was induced to hoDe so. because he knew.
from personal experience, the evils of disfranchise'
nient. He belonged to a race that had long su
fered under them. There was no evil in the
Church of Christ greater than that of prejudice a
gainst color: but this prejudice was caused who
y by the disfranchisement of colored persons.
It, when the Constitution was adopted, they had
been entitled to vote like other citizens, there
would have been, now, none of this prejudice, but
they would have attained to the same political em
inence as white men enjoy. Tiiere was no prej
udice at tne ooutn against the colored race : it
was the interest of the planter to love the colored
people. It was in the North, where the colored
man was nominally free, but had no political
rights, that his race was despised and hated
was enough that the colored people were disfran
chised, let not abolitionists share the same fate
If they ceased to vote at elections, they would
soon find themselves little more respected than
the colored race. They were respected now, on
ly because they held political power, let it be
understood that this power was not to be used
1.1 11 r t I t i
ana tney would soon una tnemselves ot no con
sequence in the State. Where we were deprived
by the 'laws or all political power, we were inva
riablv trampled on and abused. If abolitionists
would voluntarily place themselves in the like sit
ua.tion, they would experience, ere long, similar
treatment. Mr. C, therefore, approved the reso
lution so far as it declared that abolitionists ought
to rote: but he disagreed to so much of it as de
dared that they must vote for no man who was
not an avowed advocate ol total and immediate e
mancipation. Now the prominent candidates for
the Presidency, at the next election, would, in all
"probability, be Mr. Van Buren and Mr. Cay ; but
according to the sentiment of this resolution, the
friends of abolition could vote for neither : they
must be, therefore, practically disfranchised, and,
then, who would care for them? In some of the
States nothing was so obnoxious to people, gener
ally, as abolition and abolitionists. The members
of both political parties hated abolitionists even
more than they hated each other. Well : there
would soon be two great political conventions to
make their nominations, and every body knew
that no abolitionist could be nominated by either.
Must, then, every abolitionist in the country be
disfranchised? It was not to be thought of. It
was often said that, .when two moral evils were
presented to us, we had no right to choose either.
And this was true but might we not use the less
to prevent the greater ? Might not a man throw
his arm before the sword of an adversary to save
his head ? Now, suppose the nominating conven
tions shouid present, for the votes of the American
people, Mr. Van Buren and Mr. Clay, and the
former should say, I am not in favor of immedi
ate abolition I will do nothing to promote it, but
I will not do any thing to oppose it ; and the latter
sliould declare, If I am elected I will oppose abo
lition with all my strength; and it should thus be
manifest that he had sold himself to the South.
Might not abolitionists make use of the present
incumbent to prevent the coming in of a greater
evil?
Again, abolitionists should nol withhold their
votes, because the powers that be are ordained of
God, and would bp created ;agh all abolitionists
should May ul home. Mr. C. believed that the
Church of Christ Had greatly erred in this point.
She had too long folded her arms under the sen
timent, that Christians have nothing to do with
politics, thus surrendering the management of all
our public affairs to men of the world. The nat
ural consequence had followed, until every station
in the State was abused and degraded by worldly
principles. Now the church had no moral right
to pursue such n course, and if the resolution
should be adopted in its "whole length, this was
the course which abolitionists must pursue. Why
must they pursue this course in politics, when no
such thing was held necessary in matters of reli
gion or of education? When abolitionists elect
ed professors for our colleges, or pastors for our
churches, did they exact from them a pledge that
they should vote and act in favor of immediate ab
olition ? No. And why must politics be exalted
over morals and religion ? Let men be consistent.
If they took this stand in politics, let them take
the same stand in the church, and carry out their
principles into other relations of society. Why
go to the polls at all if some good was not, there
by, to be effected. If there was no hope of suc
cess from voting, why vote? The object was to
use politics as a means of securing great points in
morals, but if this resolution should prevail, the
franchise of abolitionists would be useless. Be
sides, we had never read of or seen an instance
where a political effort had been successful, and
the power obtained had not eventually been abu
sed. Political papers were always full of accusa
tions against the incumbents in office, and the cry
was still against the abuse of power. Now, if ab
olitionists could, by the exercise of political influ
ence, so far succeed, that they could elect any man
they pleased every year, and thus completely gov
ern the country, Mr. C. feared that they were not
so perfect but that they might be corrupted, and,
in the intoxication of power, might forget the
slave. So, while he held political rights to be sa
cred, and n powerful engine in advancing the ab
olition cause, he believed, at the same time, that
they ought not to refuse to vote for any candidate
unless he came up to the standard of an immediate
abolitionist. It appeared to him to be a letting
down of the dignity, importance, and glory of the
cause, to declare that thev would resort to politics
to advance it, but yet so perfect was their creed of
doctrine, mat they would not vote for any man
who, in the slightest degree, dissented from it. He
held that the weapons of abolitionists ought to be,
chiefly, of a moral character. It was by the force
and purity ol the Oospel ot Jesus Christ, if
any thing, mat men were to De induced to eman
cipate the slave, aiid to raise and improve the con
dition ol the Iree people ol color in this country
So far they ought to go, but if because a candi
date did not go with them the whole lengtht they
must sacrifice their elective franchise, they wou
not be acting consistently with themselves. He
hoped, therefore, that the Convention would ad
vise all abolitionists to vote, but that there it woul
stop.
Mr Cummings observed, that the ground taken
by Mr. Jiradburn had been this, thqt the Conven
tion ought not to declare it to be the duty of every
abolitionist to vote, because the conscience ol one
class of abolitionists would not let them go to the
polls. In reply to this, he would ask supposin
the convention had advanced one step beyond the
conscience of a few of their number, was the con
science of these few to regulate the course of the
whole body of the abolitionists of the United States?
Suppose the minority in a legislative body should
very solemnly declare to their brethren, that they
could not, in conscience, vote for a certain mea
ure proposed. What then? Must the will of the
majority be governed by the conscience of lhe mi
nority? And the measure, however Iraught with
good to the community, be abandoned ? Another
ground taken by the same gentleman had been
that by making such a declaration as was propo
sed, the Convention would prevent these brethren
Irom being true to their consciences, and truth to
conscience was the only hope of the world. Now,
he ivlethodist Church had laken the ground that
slavery was not a moral evil, and numbers of
southern Methodists professed to believe that
was their conscientious duty to hold slaves. But
that gentleman had come hundreds of miles, and
had, by his own showing, labored much and for
what? to get these Methodist brethren to violate
their own consciences. Let him be consistent, and
not condemn, in the Convention, the very course
he was himsell pursuing.
Mr. bradburn rose in reply, lhe gentleman
had asked whether the Convention might not ad
vance one step beyond the consciences of some of
its members, without being controlled by them ?
He supposed it might, but it might do this with
out trampling their consciences in the dust. The
gentleman had retorted upon him that he was just
as desirous of trampling on the consciences of cer
tain slaveholders. Now, if that gentleman could
prove to him that there was a slaveholder in the
world who could, and did in his conscience, be
lieve that it was his duty to hold his slaves as
brutes, and not to set them free, Mr B. would ad
mit that, in that case, it was not his duty to set
them free but there was no such case in exis
tence. No man did or could believe so, especial
ly no Christian. He did, indeed, once hear a
Methodist Bishop declare, that he believed there
were such men. Mr. B. did not, but he admitted
that no slaveholder was morally bound to free his
slaves till he was convinced, in his conscience,
that it-was his duty to do so. Ha admitted that
there were eternal principles of good and evil,
hich nothing could change; vet the character
of an individual was regulated by the degree of
his conformity to his own conscience, bo fully
persuaded was Mr. B. of this, that he would not
say but that some of the holy inquisitors, who had
inflicted death upon their fellow-men for alleged
heresy, might be entitled, on that very account, to
high place in heaven. What entitled a man to
the favor of his Creator, but his obedience to con
science s tie went lor enlightening conscience i
all he could, but still a man was bound to obey it.
Mr. U. had lately been in Ohio, and had been in
company with the editor of a certain religious pa
per published in th State, and had heard him
say, concerning the editor of another paper holding
opposite sentiments, "I wish I had that man here,
I would wring his nose to the glory of God." The
motive of the man was good, and if, so believing,
he had done' as he said, I believe he would have
been entitled to a reward in heaven. Only make
men thorough abolitionists, and they will act right
at the polls act right in the church and every
where else. Forming a political party will never
make abolitionists you must begin at the other
end make them good abolitionists, and then they
will vote right. Make their heart right, and their
head right, and then their actions will be right.
The Rev. Mr. Lee, in replying to Mr. Brad
burn and others observed that a man's duty did
not depend upon his own opinion. Conscience
might be worked into any thing or nothing, but
the distinction between right and wrong was
wholly independent of conscience. The gentle
man held it to be his own duty as an abolitionist
to act politically if it was his duty it was the
duty of other men. And if their conscience
would not permit them to do their ' duty, their
conscience was wrong. A man might not plead
his wrong conscience against his obligation to a
right action. One wrong did not justify another
a wrong conscience did not justify wrong ac
tions, because a man was as much bound to have
a right conscience as he was to pursue right con
duct. What was conscience more than a man's
opinion as to duty ? If his opinion was wrong
and he acted conscientiously, he would act wrong.
A man was bound; both to think right, and to act
right, and Mr. L. would as soon think of follow
ing a jack o'lantern to find his road, as mere con
science to find his duty. The word and will of
God was the only eternal standard of right and
wrong of duly and of sin. The gentleman in
sisted that this resolution would trespass on the
conscience of others. By no means. What was
the resolution but an expression of opinion
namely of the opinion of the majority of this
Convention respecting the course Which aboli
lionists ought to pursue? This bound nobody,
trampled upon nobody besides, had not this
Convention as much right to follow its conscience
as the gentlemen referred to had to follow theirs ?
They said they obeyed conscience in abstaining
from the polls ; the friends of this resolution o
beyed conscience no less in declaring it to be
their opinion that it was the duty of all abolition
ists to go to the polls. Tho resolution was not a
decree of fate, and if any man acted in direct con
trariety to it he would in so doing only contra
vene the opinion of this body. The gentleman
admitted that conscience was to be enlightened,
but how would he enlighten any man's conscience
as to his duty but by declaring what he believed
his duty to be ? and this was all the convention
proposed in this resolution to do. It had been
shown to him that certain slaveholders professed
it to be according to their conscience to hold
slaves. Mr. L. had himself heard them so de
clare but in this the gentleman did'nt believe
them. According to his representation slavehold
ers had no conscience, but non-resistants were all
conscience. Mr. L. could not understand such reas
oning as this. It seemed to him to be all on one side
Another Rev. gentleman (Mr. Cornish) was full of
lears that they were going to make politics para
mount to religion, and was opposed to carrying
political action too lar on that ground. Now Mr.
L. held that no man had a right to any politics
which were not a part ol his religion, rolitic;
and religion were not as too many supposed anti
podes. JI a man was bound to do all things to
the glory of God, he was bound to act politically
for the glory of God. To adopt the resolution
was not making politics paramount; it was only
lifting politics out of the.mud of party spirit and
the mire ol corruption, and placing them high on
the battlements of moral principle. Religion had
been too much excluded from man's political cal
culations and actions. The resolution sought to
bring her out of degrading obscurity and to en
tnrone nerin ner proper seat in the halls or our
national legislation. To him it was most obvi
ously the duty of abolitionists to vote, and if their
conscience would not let thern vote, they were
not abolstionisls in" the full sense of that term, be
cause it was a fundamental principle, expressly
declared in the constitution of the Abolition Soci
ety, that their members should do all that was
lawfully in their power to put an end to the exist
ence of slavery. But voting was a lawful act,
and was in their power and therefore they were
hound by their own act in uniting themslves to
the society, to promote its objects by the exercise
ol their political franchise. Ihey were bound by
the same act to influence Congress to put a slop
to slavery as they had put a stop to the slave
trade; but this surely involved political action.
He knew it had been argued otherwise. It was
admitted that to influence Congress was a thine
required by the constitution of the society from
all who joined it; but then it was asserted that
Congress might be influenced without political
action, and therefore abohtionist3 were not bound
to act politically. This was a sophism, and the
real question was not whether Congress might
not be influenced in some other way than by" po
litical action, but whether it could be influenced
in that way. If it could, then abolitionists were
bound by their own pledge to pursue this way of
nfluencing Congress as well as other ways.
heir being bound to do other things did not prove
that they were not bound to do all this thing. Be
fore objections could arrive at the desired conclu
sion, they must change the minor member of the
yllogisin and put it in this form. Abolitionists
are bound to do all they lawfully can to influence
Congress to put an end to slavery ; but Congress
Cannot be -" influenced to this end by political ac
tion ; therefore abolitionists are not bound to use
political action. An effort had been made to show
that to create Congress was one thing, to influ
ence it was another, and somen that could not
conscientiously vote to elect rulers, might never
theless conscionttously exert themselves to influ
ence rulers whom others had elected. And as an
illustration of this it had sometimes been said that
man might endeavor to influence the pope not
to grant any indulgence without thereby endors
ing the other acts of the pnpe. lhe cases were
not parallel. They would be if the pope's under
clergy were selling indulgences. If a man inter
fered then, by a petition to the pope, to interfere
by the exercise of his papal power, it would be
endorsing his authority. In like manner it had
been said that one might endeavor to influeucen
military chief not to destroy a certain town with
out endorsing his authority to destroy it. But if
the town was in a state of riot, and the strong
were destroying the weak, if a man influenced the
military chief to come in and put a stop to the up
roar, it was admitting his authority. So if aboli
tionists jnfluenced Congress to pass a law affect
ing the domestic, slave trade, it would - not be a
mere cessation from wrong action in upholding
that trade, but it would be a new act in putting it
down, just as in the case of the foreign slave trade
when Congress passed a law declaring it to be
piracy and so put an end to it. How else could
it have been done? So if Congress should de
clare the domestic slave trade a misdemeanor, and
set officers to enforce the law, this would be a
new act. And if abolitionists were bound to do
everything in their power to influence Congress
to take this course, they are bound to the whole
round of political aotion directly conducive to that
end. They said as abolitionists that the slaves
ought to be immediately emancipated and placed
under the protection of the law. If so, then there
ought to be a law to protect them, and if there
ought to be a law, there ought to be men to make
the law and if there ought to be law makers,
and the people alone can create them, then the
people were bound to create them and if the peo
ple as such were bound to create them, abolition
ists that were part of the people were bound to
create them. And if they could be created only
by voting at the polls, then abolitinists are bound
to vote at the polls. He therefore again insisted
that the pledge given by every abolitionist on
joining the society bound him to lhe whole round
of political action. If a man could come all the
way, let him come, but if in conscience he could
come only part of the' way, then let every man
come as far as he could. If he could not do all,
let him do what he could, but because he stopped
half way, let him not condemn those whose con
science permitted them to go ahead of him.
Mr. Bradburn obtained the floor for a reply,
but waived it for a motion to adjourn.
Wednesday Evening, 7 o'clock.
The meeting was opened with prayer.
Mr moved to lay the amendment to the
resolution on the table, and hoped that the mover
would eoncur in this arrangement. He thought
the convention had heard quite enough about
conscience.
After some conversation, the amendment was
withdrawn and the question recurring on tha first
resolution :
Mr. Gibbons, ot Delaware, said that all who
were acquainted with the state of things where
he resided, must know that it was impossible that
abolition candidates of the character described in
the resolution could be voted for, because no such
individual could even obtain a nomination as a
political candidate. Now, they had before them
at this time a very important question on the sub
ject of temperance. An effort was making in his
state to obtain the passage of a law similar to thai
in Massachusetts, prohibiting the retailing of al
coholic poison. Mr. G. and his friends felt" intense
interest as to the result of that effort. Now, if
two sets of candidates should be presented to ihetn.
one of which would certainly vote for such a law,
and tne other vote against it, must Mr. G. be pro
hibited from voting the fiist ticket because the can
didates upon it were not in favor of the immedi
ate abolition of slavery? He wished some reply
to mis question, and he wanted to know especial
ly how the resolution could be ncted upon by the
menus oi auoiuion in the slave stales.
Mr. lappan here asked leave to report from
the committee on the application to the Governor
in the case of the three colored men demanded bv
the Governor of Virginia, that information had
just been received that his Excellency had refused
11 .1 "
to aenver up tne men.
1 his annunciation was received by the Con
vention with loud plaudits.
Mr. II. B. Stanton said, that though the Con
vention had got rid of the amendment to the res-
olulion, the question was far from being settled,
f, said he, I believed every delegate would heart-
Iy adopt the resolution as it now stands, return
home, and honestly carry it out in action, I would
say nothing. But, resolutions adopted in Anti-
olavery Conventions have got to be too much like
custom house oaths mere forms which too many
regard as having no binding force. This class of
aooiitionists legislate nice wise men, and then ex
1 , r I rn i .
II'. !! 1.
ecute iiKe ioois. meypass very strong resolves
on the subject of political action, but, arrived at
the point where they can act efficiently for the
slave, they utterly fail. They will sit in "our meet
ings and listen to truth, and cringe under anti-sla-
very arguments, and bow their heads and let the
blow pass over, and then return home and let the
collar of party eat into' the very sinews of their
ccks. In the business committee, I at first, op
posed the introduction of these resolutions, be
cause we had so often disgraced ourselves in re
gard to political aciion, by affirming one thing and
doing another. However, the subject is- before
us, and I will briefly state my views upon it.
In my opinion the course marked out in this
resolution, is the only mode of action that will rid
the country of slavery. I will not for one mo
ment attempt to disparage lhe immense influence
of moral suasion upon a community of reasoning
men , but, the car of abolition cannot go forward
on one rail, however well laid. It must have two
rails lo run on ; and these are moral suasion and
political action at the ballot box. I take the
country as I find it, wiih its conscience deeply
corrupted on the slavery question; so rotten that
you cannot make moral truth hold. This fair
city, the political centre of this great State, is but
one spot where leading men will not fully appre
ciate those exalted considerations which are not
exclusively of a moral nature, and unconnected
with political power.. Roll up arguments heaven
high, and whether arranged before the whig or
democrat, they occupy but a small space in the
vision of the mere politician, especially on the eve
of an election.
I was surprised to hear the Fentiments which
felt from the lips of my respected friend Mr. Cor
nish, in regard to political action. Does he not
know that the principle laid down by him, operates
practically to nulify our whole anti-slavery move
men ? Can he influence the South by his argu
ments, while he thus practices? Saith the Bible.
" let those who bear the vessels of the Lord be
pure." Let abolitionists carry out their principles
at every cost, if they would hope to reach the con
science of the slaveholder. What is the doctrine
we
have invariably proclaimed to our southern
fellow citizens ? That slavery, at all times, and
in all circumstances is sinful ; and that every
slaveholder is obligated to instantly emancipate
hi3 slaves, and every southern voter bound to
make the immediate abolition of slavery, a test at
the polls. We have reasoned with them as fol
lows :
" Slavery is a sin, and should be at once abol
ished." The slaveholder replied, "Our laws
sanction it." The abolitionist rejoined, " But who
made your laws ? If they were made by slave
holders and if they are iniquitous, you are respon
sible." "But," answered the slaeholders, " if
we emancipate our slaves they will cut our throats ;
your abolition scheme will flooJ our land with
blood." To this the abolitionist replied, " If you
would avoid danger from yourselves, attach them
to you by the strong cord of gratitude set them
free ; doing them good, and the good they most
desire, is not the way to make them murder you,
but doing them injury." But if this consideration
is not strong enough, then the abolitionist resorts
to his last argument. " Suppose it should deluge
your land with blood ; if it is your duty to do it,
better to wade through blood to the kingdom ol
Heaven, than lo sail upon an ocean of nectar to
the gates of perdition. Duty is ours consequen-
ces are Lroa s. lint H wo convince mem i.iai e-
mancipation will not endanger tht'ir lives, the
slaveholder still answers, " It will reduce us to
bankruptcy." The afcolitionist in reply points to
the West Indies; to a peaceful and flourishing
community, where the bright flush of health, pros
perity and happiness has superceded the palud
hue of ruin and apprehended death. He reads to
them the report of Thome and Kimball, proving
that emancipation is. as desirable lo tho master in
an agricultural and commercial point of view, as
to the slaves in a moral and spiritual. But if they
disbelieve these facts, the abolitionist returns to
his high ground, and again urges, "What if it
it sliould reduce you td bankruptcy? Better lodge
in an alms-house on a pallet of straw with a good
conscience, than disobey God, and sleep in a pal
ace on a downy bed." It is this high and moral
tone, this unyielding adhesion to tha stern requi
sitions of duty, that has distinguished us from all
other parties in our land on the slave question. It
is this w.iich has made us a reproach and an ab
horrence to the public which has caused us to be
rTZTr aW C,i,y-10 cil'- II was that which
caused Crandall to be imprisoned for months at the
seat of our nation government ; an incarceration
which compelled him to flee from the keen edge
of the northern winter, with a l,r,,L-Pn K Za
constitution, to the balmy air of Jamaica, where,
after resting his weary frame a few days under
the grateful shadow of a monarch's ihrone, he fi-
naiiy sunn, to rise no more the only refuge of a
republican abolitionist. It was this which caused
Dresser to be lynched at Nashville. It was an
unyielding devotion to these truths which caused
this epitaph to be written in bloody characters on
lhe winding sheet of Lovejoy An American
Citizen murdered for ins love of liberty
Were these, our brethren, right? We say they
were, and we glory in their deeds, and embulm
their name's. And shall we now turn our backs
upon them, and refuse to cling to their principles,
thus reproaching them and dishonoring ourselves?
i ernm me, ivir. rresident, to drop my charac
ter as an abolitionist, and assume for a few mo
merits that of a slaveholder from the far South
while I address a convention composed of the elite
of abolitionists from Maine to Missouri, assembled
here in solemn conclave to adopt measures for the
advancement of their cause. Gentlemen ! you af-
firm that you have got the grand catholicon which
will cure all the evils of our body politic, to wit,
immediate abolition. You take the whole Smith
by the collar, and insist that they shall swallow it.
iou nave tnundered in their ears that emancipa
tion, immediate emancipation, coinnlete and nn.
conditional, is their solemn duty, and whatever
may be the difficulties or the dangers attending i
they must all be encountered, and vet, while say
nig and doing all this, you will not yourselves risk,
for a moment, your own little, "nakrv. nitifnl.
seven-by-nine pnrtizan interests. If you can car
ry into power your northern man with southern
principles, or your southern man with northern
principles, you will not pause a moment for aboli
tion s sake. V ou demand that we make this ques--tion
a test at the polls, and vet vou will wear thr'
coller of party regardless of the chains of the
slave. You insist that we wade through blood,
if need be, for universal emancipation, while you
will not hazard the success of a constable if now
inated by your own parly, but'lo secure his elec
tion, will trample on your principles, and march
to the ballot-box over the prostrate bodv of tho1
slave to deposit your pro-slavery vote. Practice
wnat ye preach-, ye hypocrites! You ask us to
ankrupt ourselves, if need be, for the sake of prin
iple, while vou will stop your csrs to the crv of
the plundered slave, that vou may dron vour bal
lot for Ciay and the Bank, or Van Buren and thtf
Sub-Treasury, lest, should your party schemes
fail, you would be a little less successful in acquire
ing wealth. Thus you illustrate the sacrednes
of the truths you proclaim in our ears! Because'
we will not practice what you preachand yield3
every thing at your dictation, you brand us rob-'
bers, despots, man-stealers, the felons of tbe-hu--
man race. Perhaps woare but pray, gentlemen'
abolitionists, what nre you ? Ye who sav that
others should not steal, do vou steal ? Pluck the
motes, yea beams, out of your own eyes, ve arrant
apostates !
Do not these abolnionists who forget the slave.
by refusing to act for his emancipation at the polls,'
l 1 1 . i r i t
deserve an mis irom tne ooutn f
To such, let me as an abolitionist, sav What
doctrine did you preach to our friend Mr. Bimey,
now on the platform ? Immediate, uncondition
al emancipation'. He listened, and thought vou
sincere ; and in the true snirit of the early con-
vert, exiled himself from his native State. Ipft all
and nobly followed your teachings. You receiv
ed him to your amis, and glory in hfin fcand ret
lor tne sake ol your political vartv. vou wi 11 be
recreant to the very principles" which he at vour
request embraced. You take care to denounce
the South for her pro-slavery action, and yet, when
a southern man, repenting and turning from his
iniquity, comes and demands of you that vou
prove the sincerity of your professions bv
embodying in action lhe doctrines you proclaim
ed to him, you reply, "O, just wait awhile do ex
cuse us tiil ibis election is over rcertain circum
stances make it necessary to sacrifice principle to,
party, just now." Thus you make yourselves
hissing to the South, a laughing-stock to corrupt
politicians, and a grief and a burden to the true
hearted among you.
I will now answer the questions of my friend
from Delaware, (Dr. Gibbons) He says they
are agitating the Temperance qnestion in his
State, and he does not like to risk that reform for
the sake of the anti-slavery caue. He asks, if
he must refuse to vote for a man who is right en
temperance, unless he is also right on abolition t
My answer is-in such circumstances, do not mere
ly make abolition the test question, but vote for no
man to represent you who is not right on the ab
olition question, and temperance question also!-
in other words, vote for a man of sound moral
principle. Nor is there so much difficulty in such
a course of proceeding as many suppose: for, I
take it upon me ta Say, that a man who is thor
oughly right on the slave question, will be right
upon almost every other moral question. Show
me the man who believes from his heart and upon
principle, that sfavery is a sin-must be immedi
ately repented of and at once abandoned, and who
acts consistently with that belief will such a mart
legislate to support intemperance ? Never! Let .
me sny t. all temperance men, and also' to tha
friends of lhe Sub-Treasury, and no less to its op
ponents, that the man who fails on the question of
slavery is unfit to bo a legislator in anv case, be
cause he shows that he is in favor of laws which
sanction robbery, which permit stealing, which
justify adultery and Sabbath breaking, which
shroud the mind in hopeless ignorance, quench the
light of the gospel, and bar ont millions of men
from the hope of heaven in a word, which tram
ple on every right, human and divine. Will vouj
tell roe that such a roan is fit to legislate for a
free and christian people, be his pvofess-ions what,
thy may in regard to the currensy, or impriscm-i
ment for debt, or intemperance ? I can never be
lieve it.
I admit that we are frequently placed in an errw