The voice of freedom. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1839-1848, 1839-08-31


any thing, that men were to be induced TO eman
cipate the slave, and to raise and improve the con
= dtion of the free people of color in this country
So far they ought to go, but if because a candi
date did not 60 with them the whole length, the,
must sacrifice their elective franchise, they wou
not be acting consistently with themselves. Fl
hoped, therefore, that the Convention would ad
wise all aboitioniss to vote, but that there it woult
stop.
Mr. Cummings observed, that the ground taker
by Mr.. Bradburn had been this, that the Conven
ton ought not TO declare it 10 be the duty of every
abolitonist to vote because the conscience of one
class Of abolionsts would not let them 60 TO the
polls. In reply to this, he would ask-supposng
the convention had advanced one step beyond the
conscience of few Of their number, was the con-
science of these few to regulate the course of the
whole body ofthe aboitoniSts ofthe United Statesi
Suppose the minority in legislative body should
very soletnny declare to their brethren, that they
could not, in conscience, vote for a certain meas
ure proposed What then? Must the will ofthe
ma ority be governed by the conscience of the mi
nority? And the measure, however fraught with
good to the community, be abandoned? Another
ground taken by the same gentleman had been,
that by making such declaration as was propo-
sed, the Convention would prevent these brethren
from being true to their consciences, and truth to
conscience was the only hope of the world. Now,
the Methodist Church had taken the ground that
slavery was not moral evil, and numbers of
southern MethodiSts professed TO believe that it
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 10 violate
their own consciences. Let him be consistent and
not condemn, in the Convention, the very course
he was himself pursuing.
Mr.. Bradburn rose in reply. The 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 DESTROYS of trampng on the consciences ofcer-
tain shareholders. Now, if that gentleman could
prove to him that there was STAKEHOLDER 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 adj
NIT 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 STAKEHOLDER was morally bound to free his
slaves till he was convinced, in his conscience,
that t-was his duty to do so. He admitted that
there were eternal principles of good and evil,
which nothing could change; yet the character
of an individual was regulated by the degree of
his conformity to his own conscience. 80 fully
persuaded was Mr.. B. of this, that he would not
say but that some Of the holy inquistors, who had
inflicted death upon their fellow-men for alleged
heresy, mgh be entitled on that very account, to
high place in heaven. What entitled man to
the favor of his Creator, but his obedience TO con-
science ? He went for enlightening conscience
all he could, but still man was bound to obey it.
Mr.. B. had lately been in Ohio, and had been in
company with the editor of certain religious pa
per published in the The. 8 late, and had heard him
say, concerning the editor of another paper holding
opposite sentiments, 81 wish had that man here,
| would wiring his nose to the glory of God" The
motive of the man was good, and if, so believing,
he had done as he said believe he would have
been entitled to a reward in heaven. Only make
thorough abolitonists, and they will act right
at the polls-act right in the church-and every
where else. Forming political party will never
make abolitonists-you must begin at the other
them good abolitonists, 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 MIR. Brad
burn and others observed that mans 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 abotIonist
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
was wrong. 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 &C
tons, because man was as much bound to have
a right conscience as he was to pursue right con-
duct What was conscience more than mans
opinion as to duty? If his opinion wrong
and he acted conscentiousy, 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 olantern 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 duty and of sin. The gentleman in
sisted that this resolution would trespass on the
conscience ofothers BY no means. What was
the resolution but an expression of opinion
namey-of the opinion of the majority of this
Convention respecting the course which aboli-
Iionists ought to pursued This bound nobody,
,rop,nlod nnon nohodv-besides had not this |