Vermont telegraph. [volume] (Brandon [Vt.]) 1828-1843, 1839-01-23
For the TELEGRAPH.

6foHeF INUrTdy:-l have never attempt
ed "to prescribe the manner" in aohich vou
should fotloa0 me at ALL Imerely vished
that you 1couLd foltoW me in some manner
But from the first you have Utterly refused
to follow me at all. aimed first to show
what the Declaration meant, ard what was
its natural and anticipated practical applca-
ton, that we might discuss the right and
wrong Of tangible realities, and not mere
abstract declarations which might be made
to mean anything or nothing, just as the
emergencies of the discussion might require.
But you have not yet either admitted or
denied single position have taken. But
you say, "if go into an extended answer,
brother Curtis cries out, stop, stop."-Never
! Never. have indeed had occasion TO call
you back 10 the subject when you had gone
off in tangent from it. But never have
designed to repress any ansper however
long. Irdnt an dnsper to some of nv
enquiries. have repeatedly called for n
answer, but cannot get it. fl r.e ...
But my articles have been $50 short,n
. they could not be answered. | will en-
deaVor to remedy that fault. You complain
moreover that l have "mot get quoted a
single passage of Scripture, or brought
one argument against The "sentiments''
draacn from the Bible" Is there any oc-
casion yet for such an argumentum al
inridfam? How often have repeated the
remark that as yet / am endeavoring 10
Explain the meaning OF the "Sentiments."
l shall quote Scripture when come TO dis
cuss the meritsrof the question.
Yours, &c, H.C.
+ Thoughts on " Non-R esistance.. No, 4.
have hitherto directed attention to the
f practical application Of the sentiments of
the "Declaration," when adopted by indi-
rfdudls. But the signers of that Declare
ton do not design merely to cherish these
sentiments themselves. They intend most
: lndustriously to propagate them. awe
purpose" say they, "to assdH inquiry
/. e. everything which does not accord with
I the Declaration-"to apply our principles
10 all existing ciril, political, legal and
, ecclesiastical institntions" And they
e might have added domestic institutions
also. For the ploughshare OF destruction
under such guidance will not be permitted
to stop midway. 1t will be driven through
the family; and all domestic subordinatiou
/, must be abolished. At least think il car
; be shown that the consistent carrying out Of
the sentiments of the Declaration, involve;
afl>this.
J But The first enquiry here ought evidently
t to have reference TO the meaning of the
Declaration. awe purpose to apply our
/ principles TO all existing civil, political, lie
: gal and ecclesiastical Institutions And
what IS the result anticipated and aimed a,
by such on application? Evidently mol ID
! reform but TO subrert all human eoreru
!, menI The slgners Of the Declaration say
3 we cannot acknowledge allegiance TO any
= human government" This remuneration O.
: allegiance is unlimited aud universal. They
10 mol say I've cannot acknowledge allegi.
), ance till these governments are essentially
n reformed, or till some particular features o
S lhelr administration such as military de
e tenees, &C., the infection of capital punish
; men's, be changed" No. No indication i
5 given OF allegiance 10 any form of govern
Y ment which may ever be established amons
men.
: The objection seems to be made NO, >,
T. any particular form or forms of human GOV
s ernmentas being faulty, but 10 human gov
ernments, as such. The principle seems I,
s. be this that man cannot have any righ,fu
5, duthority over man-that no subordinate,
] IS due from one human being 10 anotbe,
n and hence that all human government /;
n usurpation-an assumption of power, no
y :. vested IN man--that every human being !
= to be responsible directly to God. and +,
ls HIM alone; This | understand "a ha ~
70 meaning Of the Declaration. Is it uprea
: sonaoie that before ! go on 10 discuss hi
m principle ask whether or not this be ~
lie meaning OF that Declarations I d,, ~
:, 7 WISH 10 spend nay strength in demo6sh;n,
n "spec'res and chimeras diren which bor
lie noreat existence. Is or is not oppositio, /,
= all human governments. as such, an int
'. grant part and parcel" of tina, Deelara,;on
g, My inquiry is not whether human au,bo,;,
q =. IS paramount TO Divine whether we are +,
5, obey men rather than God, but simpl
in whether, according to that d., lara,;on me
I'd can have any rightfuL autbor;,,, - :.