Vermont telegraph. [volume] (Brandon [Vt.]) 1828-1843, 1843-09-27

wards anu puDloHHeutS i'll ou0 "olIu
more than another. / spoke OF Rewards
and Punishments. He, in pretending TO
oppose me-singular as it may seem from
Universaist - went into support of fn-
ture rewards and punishments. And |
know not but he designed to embrace
what be would call Gods punishments in
the present world. He was so vague, In
direct, and indefinite, that it was exceed
ingly difficult 10 know what be did design
to embrace. 1t was manifest he did not
know for himself what he Gid want to
embrace or include. What he did not
want 10 NEEDLE with, was more clear and
certain. He did not want to come in con-
tact with existing popular institutions. In
my article against rewards and punish
ments, il was not my design or desire to
get into controversy with any one, nor to
avoid it. My object was to expose what
deemed to be great and mlschievous
error in the world. Seeing the course Of
the Watchman and the cunning of its Ed
itor in his fearfulness 10 offend with hole
some truth faithfully spoken, put him
four questions, TO d.aw him out, and con-
strain him 10 define his position before
his readers, or refuse TO do it. had dis
carded rewards and punishments. He
had pretended to meet me and support
them. had put fire and brimstcne, can
mons, bomb-shells, bastiles, guillotines,
bludgeons and swords all down in one
family. He. in pretending to meet me,
had carefully avoided committing himself
before his readers, in regard TO punish
ments inflicted by men. He had spoken
Of punishment as effect following cause.
Ii he had allowed his readers to see nv
articles, SO that they could Judge for them
selves, should have been better satisfied,
and been willing 10 let the matter rest
with fewer words. But he would not do
it. 1t would not answer his purpose.
To let his readers see my articles would
be as if the priesthood should ALLOW the
people to know and judge for themselves.
1t is the business of the priesthood TO
keep knowledge from the people. And
he, as priest, was bound, Of course, moi
to lie: his readers know what he was talk.
ing about l am not now speaking Of
Eli Ballou as man. am speaking O.
Eli Ballou as an editor and pries,
Seeing his position, and his determination
TO keep his readers from knowing VIVA,
his position was, resolved TO draw OF
drive him out before them, and so pro
pounded him the following questions =
) "l. Does he hold all TO be aOroag IN Re
) a0ards and PnnishmentS, IN tie uniUerse
/. beyond iohat comes ia the nature of III
case necessarity from the vioLation of nat
uraL law, as effect folIo1cing cause
2. Does he 6ellere that the Bible teach
ings on this subject generally sustain sue,
a riew? 8. Does he beLiece that huma,
governments proceed on any such vieu
or are any such thing? A. Would h
haze any other human government tha,
aDhGt Mould be consistent Nth such rieto
, and principles? The former two ofthes
questions he made some evasive remark
upon. But gave no answer to them. n
one could know his position in regard il
them. Whether he wished to have
4 known, 1t is not for me to say. NOR
! think, however - and this is the NOR
charitable view - tina. he is wanting il
courage TO think on the subject far en-
a ough to form an opinion for himself, AM
, more wanting in courage to express al
h opinion if he had formed one. am Lex
! 10 this view from his treatment of the lal
: ter two Of these questions, the Sd and tn
4 Ain. He says ct them -" We shall nc
!. answer Mr.. Murray's Sd and 4th ques
tons. because, we do not wish, at presen
!. 10 have any controversy with him on tn
v right or expediency OF human govern
, ments. We have not sufficiently pre-
v crossed in our investigation Of that sui
; ject 20 have any 6xedsor settled opinion
s about it," Judge ye whether my opniol
Of as to his want Of courage, is well fount
10 ed. As for his mot wanting any conlr
r versy" with me on the subject, it will I
at recollected lha! the attack was common
m ed on his own part, in the shape of an a