Vermont telegraph. [volume] (Brandon [Vt.]) 1828-1843, 1839-06-12
Fof the ieIegrapl
COLONIZATION.

SaEllV absent Wnen we were VlSite0 DY Mr..
Nc Cree, the Colonization Agent, thought
| would just examine him little before he
delivered his lecture, TO ascertain whether
he would be willing to answer few ques-
lions publicly, provided any of the audience
should wish for further light on the subjects
OF slavery, Colonization &c. Accordingly
just before night went to the house Of our
Pastor, Mr.. Curtis, and enquired whether
Mr.. McCree had arrived. was informed
he mad, and was introduced to him by nv
friend Curtis. soon made known nv er-
rand, and was informed that no interroga-
tons could be answered. AS Mr.. McCree's
object was to advance colonization princi-
ples-he wished TO spend the whole time
in that, and that Abolitionists were prone 20
question him for their qualification, in
stead of aiding the object for which he was
laboring.
/ found was up stump on that point,
but thought would chat with him awhile
and accordingly tarried about an hour.
Said Mr.. McCree, you abolitionists mis-
represent me, and have not so favorable
an opinion Of you as / had before came
here. enquired pho had misrepresented
and he said, mr.. Seeley' asked him
who else2 He mentioned another person.
but do not recollect whether he mentioned
the name of the individual. asked him
whether, should a man go from the North TO
the South and lecture on abolition. and get
ntobbed, he would consider it fairness to Law
the blame upon all southern men? He
said no. then told him if some abolition
lists had done wrong, he ought not to attach
blame TO the achole. | asked him wherein
Mr.. Seeley had misrepresented him2 He
said in regard to the san Of slavery. He
He said ne did not tell Mr.. Seeley that he
considered slavery not sinful. asked him
whether he did consider american ,Slaperu
sinful? He said yes--but not always OF
IN every case. He believed the system not
in accordance with the spirit of the Gospel
-still thought man might hold slaves and
not SIN in so doing-and that that was what
ne told Mr.. Seeley. He said Mr.. Seeley
pressed him to say whether he thought i,
sin in all cases to hold slaves, and he an,
swered No. asked him whether he tho,l
man might steal, under certain circum.
stances, and not sin in so doing2 He paus.
ed moment, and SAID yes. Then, said
| |, why do you not preach that it is not sin in
all cases to steal, instead of preaching that
1t IS sin? He said the cases were not par
allel-that Roman Slavery was worse than
American, and the Savior and apostles did
not condemn those who were converted,
Tor holding slaves-that Paul enjoined it up
on the slave TO return to his master, &c. /
asked him whether Paul did not also enioin
T 1t upon the master TO receive the slave or
servant as his equal, and whether he could
be his equal while a slave 2 also asked
HIM whether, were he preaching in the
Southern States and the slave of a chris
tan should be converted, he would eniein
| IL upon the master to receive him as his
equal? He said that the slaves were in
many places permitted to commune at the
same table, and at the same time, with their
masters, and that many of the owners used
every possible means to render the situation
OF their slaves more comfortable than their
own. That Paul did not mean thar The
slave should be released from his seryitnde
to- his master-else he would have said co
told him if the slaves Jared so much better
than their masters, the case ought to be re-
rersed, awhile, that the masters might re-
celVe the blessings of slavery. He howey-
er seemed to think the slaves not competent
TO act as masters, and that it was best as If
now stood. asked him again. Do Won
think the Bible sanctions slavery? Said
ne, think the spirit of the Bible is on
posed to slavery, bat as the south are
placed-they not being the originators of
the system, many of them hold slaves and
do not sin in so DOING Said I, then of
course you think the Bible sanctions slave
ry under certqin circumstances. YES.
was the reply. told him could bring as
much Bible testimony against Slavery as he
could against stealing. He seemed to
doubt it. He said'he thought it benefit in
many cases for good man TO buy and hold
slaves-it was for their benefit. Treplied
It might do man good to steal. I asked
him whether an individual had right to
benefit one man at the expense of ten 9th
ers He said no.-but he might benefit
one IN that way and injnre no others. re-
piled that the holding of slaves by these