Vermont telegraph. [volume] (Brandon [Vt.]) 1828-1843, 1839-05-08

not resorled to the use of msrepresenta-
tons, denunciat.on and buffoonerv-the
usual weapons with which we have been
assailed-but have treated the subject
with becoming courtesy and dignity, and
are entitled to respectful consideration and
reply One argument urged against our
cause in both Of those publications, and
with much plausibility and specionsness,
IS, that inasmnch as The n-sIaveholling
States have by the Constitution no power
to act directly, either through Stale or
National Legislation upon slavery in the
sIavehoding States, they cannot rightfnI-
ly operate indirectly for its abolition there
The ground thus assumed is sustained in
the following manner by Dr.. Wayland:
But | 60 sill further. hold that a
compact is binding, in its spirit as well
as in its letter. The spirit Of tue COM
Ipact, [ suppose, imposes upon me the
!obligation not 10 DO anything for the par
Epose Of changing the relation Of master
and slave, except with the consent Of the
master. have 10 right to decIAre the
abolition Of slavery in another State; |
have conceded that this is TO be left to the
free choice Of the citizens Of that State
have no right to do anything to inter-
fere with that free choice. have, there
fore, no right to excite such a state of
feeling among the slaves, that the master
shall be Obliged, from physical necessity,
to libelat his slaves. whether he believes
it 10 be right AMI wise, or whether he
believes the contrary This is as much
a violation of the spirit of the compact
as an arbitrary act of Legislation. The
compact comedies, that it is to be left to
the free 7clU Of the States, and | oblige
them to act in accordance with my will,
and not in accordance with their own
) This is a violation of clear and solemn
: obligation. [ have no control over the
manner in which my neighbor shall edu-
cate his children, and to interfere. by phys
ical force, IN order TO oblige him to edu-
} cate them as please, would be Infamous
| But if I stir up such feeling in his
family, that he is obliged to follow my
; suggestions in order to save himself from
being poisoned l am equally infamous
The. violation Of right is as great in the
one case as in the other If question
has been left to my decision, I claim the
privilege of deciding it for myself and |
( thank no one for deciding it for me, much
} less do thank him for taking the decis-
: ion out of my hands and settling it by
+ physical force. And it matters nothing
to me, whether this physical force be
4 exerted by my neighbor himself. or wheth-
}, er he sir up another man to exert it. In
), both cases, it is a palpable and insolent
q violation of right
1t will be observed that the foregoing
J. arguments rests entirely for its force upon
a the assumption that the master is to BE-
operated upon by physical force OF
+ physical necessity to liberate his slaves
IL The argument does not, therefore, sustain
l. the proposition as above stated 1t only
e sustains the proposition, that the people
= = of the non-slaveholding States, being pro
. hibited from direct action upon the subjec
of slavery in the sIaveholding States
'e cannot rightfully, by indirect action, brine
Il about the abolition of slavery by pbysic
ID al force If we grant the correctness o
le this doctrine, how does it initiate agains
III the abolition enterprise, either in its prin
50 ciples OF modes of operation? The Anti
s. in its Constitution or Declaration of Sen
IS timents, any appeal to the slaves agains
I'll the master: on the contrary, it expressly
or disavows any intention of compelling tn
e. master, through fear of violence from hi
y slaves, to abandon the system, and dis
ut cards IN toto the use of force, either d
e rectlv or indirectly, to accomplish tn
' overthrow OF slavery. It's appeals are
lie the master---to his reason, his conscience
'e his philanthropy, his interest-it aims t
Il bring him to abolish slavery himself, b
Ia the exercise of that very free choice {
Ill., which DR.. Maryland speaks. The abol
10 tionistS, ackrowledg that none hav
Sc, power 10 abolish slavery in the State
hd where it exists but the people of tho2
ce' States, assert, at the same time, their rigl
@r to use the great constitutional privilege
IT, freedom of speech and of the press, I
IN induce them. By considerations addresse
he directly to their understandings and NJ
est to their fears, to exercise their own fire
III WILL without being Obliged from ply;
'aa ical necessity TO change their laws ar
see render their bondmen, treemen. We u:
ac- the same means to bring about the resu
ne at which we aim, that DIR. Maryland DO
is when he strives to convince US that Y
'o , are pursuing a wrong course. and shou
flh' cease from it; and we use no other
ms Does it follow, then, ask, that, becau
ara the people of the free States have no Co
M stituional power to abolish slavery in /!
our slave States. by direct Legislative acti
'leh upon it there, they have no right, cons
'Sa, tutionaIly, to induce the people of t
OF slave States, by moral suasion. to chan
thar 4. IN tbo. nj yy-i. n III,