Vermont telegraph. [volume] (Brandon [Vt.]) 1828-1843, 1836-01-28

u Danger from one Sloe only, II was quIIc
natural that the opposite should escape /
heir vigilance. But do not let US initiate :
the morbid sensitiveness of the south, nor
seek to drive them Gas our Board to our
side of the question, and so endanger a
cause which needs, land can have If
proper spirit be maintained, the prayers
and efforts Of both the north and the south.
1t seems to me however that the letter
of brother Allen deserves not only the
condemnation of the Board. but of every
christian, both at the north and the south,
who believe with him that slavery is sin,
and who claim the right to proclaim it
such, and to seek Its removal by the force
of truth. Who has read that letter and |
not felt his heart sicken at its manifest syc- |
ophancy and injusticeR 1t would have
been enough for him solemnly as agent, |
to announce to the south his neutrality, to
which all would have responded, Amen.
But what right had he to lay upon the al
tar Of southern petulence the rights of his
brethren of the north! What cruel in
justice to charge the great body of his
northern brethren with an unjustttiGbte in
reference with the rights of the south-a
charge as false as it is unkind. Such
charge is unkind every way-to the abo-
litionists, because it is a false imputation
Of crime-to the south because it deceives
them in this matter. Much of the irrita-
ton Of the south is to be attributed to this
and kindred assertions, loosely made, by
those who are in more haste to please the
oppressor, than to plead the cause OF the
oppressed h is by>just such gratuitous
, assertions that our brethren of the south
f are made to count us their enemy, because
4 we could tell them the truth.
r Abolitionists interfere with the rights
: of" the south? What rights? Where
0 When2 How? A charge so grave as
= this, and made on so grave an occasion,
v and ieopardizing so dear an interest; a
j. charge too on which he was about to pro-
s claim his non-fellowship with the great
# body of his brethren of the north, should
e have been accompanied with. specifca-
e tons, and sustained by proof; but either
IS he cannot give. l confess am at loss
to find either motive or apology, for sc
e reckless and unkind charge.
v ask again with what rights Of thu
i south are the abolitionists ua!justly inter
j. 6rmg? have they-ever sought to legis
e late for them! Never, Have they sough
is to endanger their domestic quiet, by ad
dressing the slave? Never. Have they
ID taught any other duty as devolving upoI
the slave but obedience to his master, no
only to the gentle but even to the forward
Never. Hthey have, neither brother Al
len, nor any Of the disingenious accuser
;, of abolitionists, would be backward to spe
st city it. ,
~ ~ 1t is not the rights of the south wit
~ which the abolitionists are meddling bu
-, the wrongs, brother Allen himself heini
~ Judge. Hear him: II am opposed t
,s, slavery" Does he oppose right2 or
tn wrong? wrong of course. Agreed; s
H. do abolitionists. Does he exercise tn
% right to say that he is opposed to slavery
70 So do they. To write that he is oppose
% to slavery and send it to the south2 S
:, do they, (but not in the Tract Magazine
81 What then is the difference between hir
7, and them? flor now he seems to be ant
lie slavery to all intents and purposes? TIL
- difference is simply this, he lacks thei
~ honest consistency-theyl lack his servill
q @ tv. Nor will the south be backward
- ~ discern the true difference, or to hold sue
o. duplicity in utter adherence.
- Let us put the sentiments OF his lette
~ r into plain English, and STE how 1t read
m Lar opposed to Slavery that is, you
m the south are doing wrong. The aSol
- tionists are determined at all hazards
:, tell you of your wrong, and persuade yo
III to repent therefore l have no FELLOWSHIP
w. with them, but will uphold you in you
T. wrong. misunderstood him entirely
he this is not fairly the sentiment Of his lette
lot And really such letter must be as otteL
M sive to the south, as to the north. n
,es honorable man of the south can be please
he with such barefaced duplicity. / have to
lie good an opinion of our slave-holdin
ltv brethren generally, to suppose for a M
he ment that they will admit the aor0mg, an
nd vet be angry at the faithful remonstranc
m. of their northern brethren. The fact l.
lie they have not felt that slavery in the a
he stract is sin AN object ever pressin
mo- dims the sight" They have slept owe
on the sin Of slavery just as other christian
Of have slept over other sins that have com
MI down to them from other generations
h. Familiarized to it from childhood, and ha
ing misapplied the scriptures on the sui
FIR iect, while they have eschewed many
,or its evils, they have not thought that slar
,er ~ itself is sin. Let them but see tn
in slavery at its root is SIN, is guilt. is Grim
10 and YOU may expect from them such a
of ton on the subject as becomes christian
red They are now beginning to wake up
of The expostulations OF the few fanatics
emit of the north, have disturbed their stun
bers. It is true they are little pet
in lent bat what of that i. is nothing stran.
-. I -. 1:S,o,,ron.or Childron 80, lno