Vermont telegraph. [volume] (Brandon [Vt.]) 1828-1843, 1838-07-18

what! 10 tue agents vi SoFelhSn" Ala 'NS
Southern States, the servants of the people,
compel the people, their masters. against
heir nil to enslave their fellow-men q
against their aciH, TO commit one of the
greatest possible outrages upon humanity, !
and one Of the most fragrant acts OF rebellion !
against Code If it were really against their
will, is not the remedy in their own hands ?
Are not the lawmakers themselves made by
the people? But where is the law, requir-
ing any man, agains: his will, to be slave
holder,-or constituting any man the guar
dian of his sable brother, whether he is dis
! lure to affirm that no such law can be found.
The law koows no such relation as inuolun-
ttary guardianship. recognizes the slave
holder, as the proprietor, not the guardian
of the slave. A guardian is one entrusted
with the management Of the interests Of a
oard, not for his oa0n benefit, but for the
benefit of the pard His voluntary accept
ance of the trust, is essential to the existence
| of the relation. The slave-holder, on the
contrary, claims absolute property in, and
assumes despotic control over, one who has
no interests; and this, not Tor the benef; Of
the latter, but for his oUn. Tell US not,
then, that sIaoe-holding is guardianship
Tell US not either, that slave-holding is in
voluntary. | know, indeed, that in some OF
the States, the law has thrown difficulties in
the way of emancipation, but if these diff
cultes were ten times greater, conscien-
tious man would find means to overcome
them. At the worst, he has only to pass
with his slaves into some other State, where
these difficulties do not exist.
But you say, (and l suppose your object in
sayingit, is oprorethe assertion, that slave
holders are Involuntary gudrd1dns,) that
"when the present generation Of slave hold
ers came into existence, slavery was here :"
Chat is, in the South -"that it was, and had
been, for many years regulated by law, and
: one Of the institutions of the State, "-and
that "many thousands Of servants were Civ
en- to their present masters by their forefa1h-
ers, while both the masters and their servants
j were in their minority" Now, seriously,
E nv brother, what does all this amount to q
: Does the antiquity of moral evil, render il
: less an evil? Then idoldtry is less an evil
+ than formerly. Does the sanction of human
K laws, make that right which is in itself
e prong? Then the false religion Of Burmah
+ and China is right, for it is established anC
p REGULATED by law, and one of the institution.
e of the State" (By the way, slavery is no
) an institution, but prdctice,-protected
r indeed, but not required by law Or d.
% the wrongs Of our torefathers authorize u
re to perpetrate like wrongs? Then the infant
G. icide of India, and its internal suttees, and
10 thousand other bloody and bsrbarous prac
tees, are authorized. What if many of tn
u slaves pere given to their present master
n by their fathers, while the present master
Re were in their minority? Are they, on tn;
10 account, the less voluntary, in holding the
is slaves in bondage? Besides, the act of Civ
r. ing slave, morally considered, is in itself
~ nullity. 1t cannot rightfully be done. Whs
IL if my father had given me stolen property
10 my minority? Is it therefore mine? An
nc am its Involuntary possessor, while re
Ia sist the claim of the rightful owner? Sue
10 reasoning will not do. You must bring otI
We er facts, and stronger arguments, before 20
g. will "succeed in giving [us at the north
nd such view as [you] have of this subject,
ng that is, that sldre-holding is imUoluntar
0r guardianship; or in persuading US that OF
% brethren who practice it, "really merit OF
I'D most cordial appreciation for doing so UNDE
as PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES" Present circun
~, stances! What are these circumstance
u which have the magic power of changiu
n wrong to right, cruelty to kindness, and ro1
It's berry to guardianship? They do not appea
You affirm, that "with the real or supp
IN sed SiminaIity of those who first brougl
ut slaves into this country, our slave-holdins
ID brethren have nothing to do" This is chez
en- fully granted. But will you say, that the
zee have nothing to do with their own crimina
are ity, in withholding from their brethren II
al rights which God has bestowed alike upc
by all? "The son shall not bear the iniquiti
te- Of the father;'' but remember, my brothe
hat that the same authority has said, THE so
ter that sinneth, it shall die" You cannot di
tie. Germ the guilt Of our brethren, in being ma
al shareholders, Sin the aoay you hare ma,
ur- ed n-that is. by the act of their father