The voice of freedom. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1839-1848, 1839-05-25

Fitch. His veracity is unquestonable. He left
this place about last fall, we think, for Jamaica
where he is now acting as missionary.
ss More of MIR. Blanchard's Reports from Ver-
mont"
Mr.. ED1roR-Chance has thrown in my way
the Vermont Chronicle" of April Sd inst, in
which the Editor under the above caption, contra
diets some published statements by me in the late
Colonization debate. He quotes from me the fol-
lowing =
at appears by sort ST annual address of Eli
jah Paine to the people of Vermont, in favor of
Colonization, lately published in Mr.. Gurley's
Statesman, at Washington that only two cler-
gymen, in all the State of Vermont, took up col
lections for this cause during the year of the ad-
Dress"
On this the Chronicle remarks -
at was not sort of annual address : nor is
there in it any such statement as that only two
cergymen," &c.
Judge Paine's Address begins thus =" 1t has
been my duty for several years past, as President
of the Vermont Colonization Society, annually, in
the spring of the year, to address the clergy and
people of Vermont on the subject of Colonization.
now address the people more particularly on
that subject as private individual" Quoting
this address from memory, called it sort of an
annual address, The Chronicle Editor deems
the matter Of sufficient importance, among other
things, to call for editorial correction
In the ardor of debate, also quoted Mr.. Paine
as saying but taco ministers in the State had that
year taken up collections for Colonization. Re-
curing to the address, find there were SIC My
mistake amounted to this that did not give Col
onizaton due credit by the number of four clergy
men in an entire State. MY. obect being to show
of no nj
good men; it could make nothing in my favor
whether the address was annual or occasional, and
next to nothing whether the adhering Vermont
clergy were two or six. | was moreover, quoting
from Mr.. Gurley's paper, the gentleman opposed
to me in the debate, and felt under less obligation
to laborious precision as Mr.. Gurley was present
to correct me, if | made an unfair representation.
These two las it seems to me) immaterial and
altogether unimportant statements, are all which
the No. of the Chronicle before me contradicts.
The Editor states the action of the Convention of
Vermont Clergy as did, viz: That resolutions
were offered rendering to southern Shareholders
their prayers and their contributions in the
matter of aboshing slavery; and that the word
contributions was stricken out by the Conven-
ton. Any one informed in the slavery controver-
sy, sees that by taking out contributions, the
Convention extracted all the Colonization from
the resolutions as prayers alone would hardly
pay the passage of single slave to Liberia, al
though they might favor the liberation Of the op-
pressed by the oppressor. Yet the Editor, in the
paper before me- tells his readers, If the vord
contributions acaS stricken out the sense acas not
altered!r
To my mind, when the Editor says that Mr..
Paines address " contained no sucA' statements
as only two clergymen," &C., he falls into great
er error with the document before him. than
did, quoting from memory. Mr.. Paine does state
only sic clergynen in the State took up collections
that year for the Society; and this is precisely
Such' a statement as made in all logical bear
ings; as it shows that almost the whole mass of
Vermont clergy have given up the cause of Colo
nlzation which they once supported-which was
all wanted of the fact.
If these remarks meet the eyes of readers of
the Chronicle, (many of whom have been but too
kind 10 my childhood and youth) | respectfully
request them to consider with care the Chronicles
influence on the question of cleansing the church
and delivering the land from slavery. Neither
the Editor nor the cause of TRUTH had any interest
in disparaging clergyman in distant State, so
young and obscure that the Editor did not hold
himself bound by the rules of common editorial
decency, to send him the paper which assailed his
veracity. Chance threw the Chronicle in nv
What other of Mr.. Blanchard's reports this edi-
tor has commented upon, know not. No! 1t is
not hatred to an obscure individual, but an inbred
dislike TO the cause, as managed by Abolitionists,
which makes the Editor in question sort of uni
versal fault-fnder with almost every body and ev-
cry thing but shareholders, their apologists, and
slavery, Such he most surely was, (since slavery
has been most vigorously assaed,) so long as
was reader of his paper. l do not complain of
his avocation. 1t has its uses and there are none
OF his acquaintance but will grant him the possess
sion of talents wonderfully adapted to it. | only
suggest that it seems pity that religious Jour
nails should not be, at this eventful day of the
Church, in the hands of men whose capacity fits
them to comprehend the magnitude, not to say the
submity of a reform, which proposes to take hu-
mainly out from under the law of brute property,
where it has lain since the earth first groaned be-
meath oppression; and whose hearts are not so
enlarged by charity to their kind, that they cannot
turn from the contemplation Of three millions OF